Gatekeeping and the Beam Meta

Jaimeh · September 23

In a PUG anything goes as long as you can reasonably fulfill your role and complete the task, and when I run with a random group, I usually do it with my most well-geared characters, so that it doesn't really matter what the other group members have: if there's a fake tank I can slot a taunt so that people don't kite stuff around, if there are slow DDs, I can make up for the damage, and so on. If someone is an experienced player it shows through no matter their specifics, for example, I always know it when someone who is low level/CP is leveling an alt character or a new account, and they are not actually a new player, from the way they cast skills and position themselves. Regarding gatekeeping, I don't really think there's true gatekeeping in the game, at least the way people mean it; if an organized group needs DDs to have a specific set-up, that's not gatekeeping, that's how that group runs things, and players who don't agree can make their own groups instead, so no one is barred from content. I personally dislike the new dps meta that revolve around the arcanist beam a lot, but if we need to do X amount of damage for, say, a specific speed run, then I will bring my arcanist, because that's what the group needs--if I insisted on a build that knowingly underperformed, then I would be the selfish one, because we wouldn't be able to reach our objective. Having said that, if only a HA build is available to a person, that's perfectly fine if they can play it well, because it can still do high numbers, while having sustain and mitigation built in, and it's a smart idea for safer strategies as well. A lot of groups are opting for only HA builds for certain fights, it's also good for PvP, and it's well established in the game by now, so people who are miffed by it, probably have their own issues. You can find good and bad players within any given playstyle pool, but I have noticed this happening a lot: because heavy attacking is a ranged playstyle, and because wearing Oakensoul is very forgiving, I've seen the majority of players standing in AoEs, or in front of the boss, or being really far away from group, maybe because they don't need the buffs and because the incoming damage is not dangerous, but this means that they don't get into the habit of good positioning, which becomes important in later endgame, and for me this is the only downside to the playstyle.

mdjessup4906 · September 23

Asdara wrote: »

Hey everyone,
I’ve been playing ESO since beta, and one of the things I’ve always loved is how diverse the community can be - different builds, different playstyles, different people all coming together.
But lately, I feel like discrimination and gatekeeping are at an all-time high.
Instead of helping or supporting each other, people are being excluded or mocked for their playstyle, identity, or simply not matching someone else’s “meta.”

Here’s an example that happened today, in vet pledge, so fairly medium LVL content, we're not talking about trifecta or else huh:

Meanwhile, this main arcanist :
- Left after 1 wipe
- Didn't focus adds and that's what wiped the group
- Had like 20k hp (no food buff?) and DIED FIRST

This is what happens when design forces everyone into a single box. People don’t want to carry anyone who doesn’t fit the exact mold, and players who experiment or just want to enjoy a different style get punished for it. I keep seeing people point fingers at the ESO community for being “toxic” or “gatekeeping,” but honestly? The root of the problem is ZOS.

ZOS keeps pushing heavy attack sets, but they’re some of the weakest and most frustrating designs I’ve ever seen. At the same time, everything is being funneled into the beam meta. The end result? Players are stuck in a corner: either you run the one style that ZOS clearly wants, or you get insulted, excluded, and told you’re “unviable.”
It’s not just about players being mean, it’s about how the game is designed. If sets and builds were actually balanced, if multiple playstyles were equally viable, there wouldn’t be this endless discrimination against anyone who isn’t running the current meta.

And here’s the real kicker: ZOS keeps advertising ESO with the slogan “Play how you want.” But the reality is the opposite, set design and balancing push everyone into the same narrow beam meta. If you actually try to “play how you want,” you’re punished for it even in basic content, whether through weak sets, bad scaling, or being excluded from groups. The marketing and the gameplay direction just don’t line up.

Sorry you got a dickhead. Not all us meta slaves are like that. Ha builds done well do vet level damage just fine.

Fwiw my herald/assassin/ardent beam machine runs around 18-20k health because I cant sustain on anything but parse food, so not that unusual. The rest is on them though lol.

Also I despise ha playstyle too*. Love my arc, at least I did until I had to make it 1/3 dk. Never wanted to play dk but what do you do, not do damage?

*for myself. Someone else likes it good for them.

Asdara · September 23

Blood_again wrote: »

Sorry, your topic is "Discrimination and Gatekeeping".
Correct me if I'm wrong. You had a random group, and one dd left the group motivating it with others' play style.
Who was gatekept in this situation? If the player left the group, they did their choice, the rest of the group is free to keep playing. The player that left mocked themself, whatever they said. Because you keep running the dungeon and that player doesn't.
The group didn't exclude you for your playstyle and didn't require you to play another way. Did I miss something?

The other side of the situation is: what do you offer the player that doesn't like the group for some reason? Stay and struggle?
Nobody called to kick others or change their playstyle. No. The player just left.
Leaving the group you don't like is a fair part of "Play how you want". You pay the price like 15m of queuing timeout, but God save any game from prohibiting the option to leave the group.
So what do you offer? Stay in group and love whatever the group do?

This weekend I offered the lvl 48 fake tank in dlc dungeon, that he shouldn't hesitate to pull the stack.
Probably I discriminated against him for playing how he wanted. Way more than in your situation, because I offered to change his playstyle. What do you think?

You did miss something: it’s not about one random leaving, it’s about why this happens so often. The design funnels everyone into one meta, so the moment someone plays differently, they’re mocked, excluded, or written off as ‘unviable.’ That’s not just a player leaving, that’s a culture created by the way sets and scaling are designed. If ‘Play how you want’ was actually true, this wouldn’t even be a discussion.

Its one example, it happens every day in many forms.

Asdara · September 23

frogthroat wrote: »

In this particular conversation OP was talking about vet pledge from yesterday. I would assume Dread Cellar because the base games you can finish naked. And I assume they were not doing a nuke tactic because they were a PUG, so high dps can even be bad when you all of a sudden have a million ads after you.

Meta has its place. In a highly optimised group doing the most difficult content, trying to get the most difficult achievements, yes, optimise. Use meta and meta only. Have 130k dps limits minimum. Maybe even higher if you want to get to the top of rankings.

But in other content, demanding meta is a bit overkill. In the 75% example, I really wouldn't care. Unless skipping some annoying mechanic is needing 5k extra dps, it really doesn't matter that much. Yes, high dps is slightly faster but what do you really gain?

Let's throw some random numbers together. Let's say there's 2 dungeon dd's. One has meta and does 100k dps. Another has off-meta and does 75k dps. (For ease of calculations, % -> dps.) The boss has 10M health. No ads, tank keeps the boss all the time so dd's can simply parse.

They are done in 10,000,000 / (100,000 + 75,000) seconds. As in, 57 seconds.

Now, if both would do 100k dps, then the time spent on that boss would drop to... *drum roll* ...50 seconds.

If your schedule is so tight that these 7 seconds matter, what are you doing playing a video game?!

(If the dps would be 140k and 105k (75% of 140) then the difference between these against two 140k players would be in the same scenario 40s and 36s, respectively. Yay! Saved 4 seconds!)

You lose more by missing a mechanic. Or even just deconstructing between pulls to get more inventory space.

Exactly, you nailed it. Pushing for strict meta builds in content where bosses don’t even have an enrage timer is pure insanity. ESO just doesn’t work like WoW raids where you hit a wall if the boss isn’t dead by X time- 99% of fights here are about mechanics, not a hard DPS check.

I’m sitting around 95k DPS, but my build is designed for survivability and utility. I don’t just tunnel damage, I can self-heal, I stay alive through most fights, I’ve got CP set up to rez people faster, and in many runs I end up as the last man standing cleaning up when others drop. To me, that’s far more valuable than squeezing out an extra 5–10k DPS and then eating dirt the second mechanics get messy.

And that’s really the issue: when design funnels everyone into the same DPS race, people forget that survivability, utility, and consistency matter just as much (if not more) in actual group play. If meta-chasing is shaving 7 seconds off a boss fight but costing wipes because nobody can rez or survive mechanics, who’s really helping the group?

spartaxoxo · September 23

I don't think the majority of players care much in vet dungeon pugs. Every now and then you'll find someone throwing a fit their random dungeon pug isn't vet trial trifecta ready, but mostly it's non-issue. I have personally come across more fake DPS than elitist ones.

Gabriel_H · September 23

heaven13 wrote: »

The player matters, yes. I don't disagree. But throwing some numbers at it and saying "see, it's not that bad" doesn't fit this particular conversation.

You wildly missed the point. You are still basing it on a spreadsheet and not actual. The only way to see is to allow players to use their non-meta in content and see the difference.

It's also worth remembering content is not designed around 100% damage potential with 100% efficiency.

Alchimiste1 · September 23

Sorry, but I'm not going to carry a HA DD

tomofhyrule · September 23

Gabriel_H wrote: »

heaven13 wrote: »

The player matters, yes. I don't disagree. But throwing some numbers at it and saying "see, it's not that bad" doesn't fit this particular conversation.

You wildly missed the point. You are still basing it on a spreadsheet and not actual. The only way to see is to allow players to use their non-meta in content and see the difference.

It's also worth remembering content is not designed around 100% damage potential with 100% efficiency.

Ok, and how do you propose to fix this? To force all groups to bring everyone regardless of their build? How do you propose to enforce this?

Yes, there are a lot of players who play off-meta setups reasonably well. The fact still remains that the average and maximum potential of an off-meta build are still significantly lower than the average and maximum potential of an Arcbladeplar. And that’s just numbers.

I know people who run trials and allow off-meta builds. Heck, one of my friends raid-led a vAS+2 last weekend in a social guild and told them to bring Oakensoul builds and it cleared, giving 9 of the 12 people in group their first vAS HM. But raid leads like that who are willing to really work with groups are few and far between, especially since ESO’s balance is chasing a lot of those people off. And I even know people who claim that the guy who got a whole team of Oakenbuilds through a vAS HM is “toxic” because he made any suggestion to their builds whatsoever.

To be honest, a lot of these “gatekeepy” players have been burned by people with off-meta builds before - I’ve seen plenty of people who proudly proclaim that “it’s okay that they have low DPS as long as they know mechanics!” while proceeding to botch every mechanic. Not to mention that there are a number of people who are convinced that their solo-everything build is perfect because they need their self heals and armor, conveniently forgetting that the point of group content is to have healers and tanks taking care of that for you so you can focus on damage.

How would you feel if someone came up to you and said “Hi, I’ve never met you but I don’t trust that you can do your job to heal me so I’m slotting self heals to keep myslef alive. Also I’m offended that people don’t trust me to do my job and are implying my damage is low.”

Numbers also say that for the highest echelons of content (hard mode trials after Kyne’s), there honestly isn’t much wiggle room either - they’re balanced around groups which are able to put out obscene amounts of damage. And there, that “7 seconds of difference” is also the difference between a group wipe from Taleria’s mages being up too long and a clear.

You’re never going to get rid of toxicity. Ever. But if there wasn’t such a huge gap between the top build and the next one, then people would be more used to seeing other ways than what the 0.0001% of players do. If the balance were better, people would be less gatekeepy.

SeaGtGruff · September 23

kargen27 wrote: »

Asdara wrote: »

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

Toxicity and gatekeeping have been around longer than subclassing, longer than the Arcanist class, longer than "HA builds" became a "thing," and... wait for it... longer than ESO has been around! ZOS didn't create them, and doesn't encourage them. In fact, "toxicity" is one of the things you can report another player for-- although there isn't really a subcategory under it that seems appropriate for comments which insult or belittle other players.

Right, toxicity existed before ESO but you’re missing the point entirely. The game doesn’t just let toxicity happen, it creates the conditions for it. Weak sets, poor scaling, and meta funnels punish anyone trying to play differently. That’s what drives exclusion and gatekeeping, not just bad players. Ignoring the design problem doesn’t make it disappear.

Nah it's bad players. There will always be a best set right up until they put us all in the same gear like the PvP tests that are happening. Then players will want to kick you for not running to next pull quick enough or standing in the wrong spot or who knows what. Those bad players are still going to be bad players.
What changes would make the bad players suddenly become decent?

Totally agree. And I think blaming it on ZOS just helps the "bad" players justify their toxicity and bad behavior.

Treeshka · September 23

I know i have posted something on this thread already but i would like to address this as well. Do you guys think this is gatekeeping or just high expectation? The boldest measures are the safest.

Orbital78 · September 23

Treeshka wrote: »

I know i have posted something on this thread already but i would like to address this as well. Do you guys think this is gatekeeping or just high expectation? The boldest measures are the safest.

It depends on the trial really, the newest trial kind of requires a lot of cleave. Part of the issue is the lack of leaders, many just copy and paste templates and may not even know the trial fully. If they are doing a normal vet, they probably just wanna farm gear. For me personally I won't pug vOC unles it is double drops again, and even that is bait. I would probably only use a good trial discord or go with my guilds. Group Finder vets in newer trials is super hit and miss, which is probably why they have the high requirements or they want to carry a few folks.

frogthroat · September 23

Alchimiste1 wrote: »

Sorry, but I'm not going to carry a HA DD

But why? I neeeeed carry because it's late and I am too tired to do a second parse.

Edit: oh yeah, and this is practically one bar. Replace back bar crit surge with spell power potions and you never need to visit the back bar.

Soarora · September 23

Treeshka wrote: »

I know i have posted something on this thread already but i would like to address this as well. Do you guys think this is gatekeeping or just high expectation? The boldest measures are the safest.

Pugging trials aren’t really comparable to pugging dungeons. Trial runs that are “anything goes” can and often do fail. Dungeon runs that are “anything goes” hardly fail.

Orbital78 · September 23

Good leaders and supports go a long way, vOC included. All of these runs cleared, though some lasting over an hour because vOC has a stupid amount of trash pulls and we did all the sides. This was a few months ago since I haven't been doing trials lately, I think we had got most of the fights down. Skooma Emporium's leads actually had some good strats for getting the first down quicker even with our unoptimized groups.

last boss on unoptimized NB oakensoul

last boss on voidmantle sorc

#5 on my Arc, same boss

Each fight was different and had a few GF pugs to fill most likely. People aren't doing trials in our guilds as much, I think players are down in general in them. I haven't done any trials with them even and I had been a regular for a long time, after the latest nerfs and they removed the double drops I just noped on trials in general for awhile.

HA are totally viable non HM, haters are gonna hate. It doesn't take that long to fill your stickerbook and then they will run out of players wanting to bother. Especially with non-guild groups, those are just not fun for me usually. If I do find a good discord of raiders, I usually stick around. If they seem too stuck up or have too high of requirements I will bounce. At the end of the day, it is a game and supposed to be fun. Hopefully ZoS' new leadership will reinforce that to the combat team.

mdjessup4906 · September 23

Treeshka wrote: »

I know i have posted something on this thread already but i would like to address this as well. Do you guys think this is gatekeeping or just high expectation? The boldest measures are the safest.

I think your pushing your luck trying to find that in gf, but good luck lol

Kappachi · September 23

Soarora wrote: »

Treeshka wrote: »

I know i have posted something on this thread already but i would like to address this as well. Do you guys think this is gatekeeping or just high expectation? The boldest measures are the safest.

Pugging trials aren’t really comparable to pugging dungeons. Trial runs that are “anything goes” can and often do fail. Dungeon runs that are “anything goes” hardly fail.

That is extreme levels of gatekeeping. Heck, I like learning stuff as I go so I even dislike when they only ask for experienced players even if my gear/level are high enough to mitigate some mistakes.

Asdara · September 23

The title of my post has been edited by moderation for, i quote "trolling".
I've updated the title to still reflect the subject of my post to : Gatekeeping and the Beam Meta

tsaescishoeshiner · September 23

The player's attitude is an issue, not the game balance itself. If they left after one boss or wipe, it's clearly not the dev's fault and it's not gatekeeping if they just don't want to play with randoms.

There have always been players who complained about players not using a certain set, playing a certain class, etc. This isn't really new, it's just the current flavor. Make friends and play with them instead.

There are good players using heavy attack builds and there are a lot of more casual players using heavy attack builds without trying too hard to deal high amounts of damage. I don't play with anyone who assumes that heavy attack players might be more casual or less capable, but I see where a judgy endgame player might get that impression, but it's really not a rule.

If you haven't tried a standard parse (against a dummy with parse food), it's worth a shot to create a baseline comparison to improve one's rotation and build.

Beam builds are a nice in-between for an easy and effective build—more involved than a heavy attack build, but also outperforming at the higher end.

kargen27 · September 23

Asdara wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Nah it's bad players. There will always be a best set right up until they put us all in the same gear like the PvP tests that are happening. Then players will want to kick you for not running to next pull quick enough or standing in the wrong spot or who knows what. Those bad players are still going to be bad players.
What changes would make the bad players suddenly become decent?

its not "just bad player" prior to this year i've NEVER seen that many group in group finder actively refusing HA or onebar build.
If you want to stay on copium and say everything normal and its always been that way, well i can't pull you out of your cognitive dissonance.

See when you insult the messenger that tells me you don't have a legitimate response to the message. Again I ask what changes to the game would make these players with bad attitudes suddenly start acting decent?

Asdara · September 23

kargen27 wrote: »

Asdara wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Nah it's bad players. There will always be a best set right up until they put us all in the same gear like the PvP tests that are happening. Then players will want to kick you for not running to next pull quick enough or standing in the wrong spot or who knows what. Those bad players are still going to be bad players.
What changes would make the bad players suddenly become decent?

its not "just bad player" prior to this year i've NEVER seen that many group in group finder actively refusing HA or onebar build.
If you want to stay on copium and say everything normal and its always been that way, well i can't pull you out of your cognitive dissonance.

See when you insult the messenger that tells me you don't have a legitimate response to the message. Again I ask what changes to the game would make these players with bad attitudes suddenly start acting decent?

Calling out copium isn’t an insult, it’s frustration at people pretending this has always been the same. It hasn’t. I’ve played since beta, and only recently have I seen HA and one-bar players consistently refused in group finder. That shift didn’t come out of nowhere, it came from design changes funneling everyone into one meta. No change will magically make every rude player ‘act decent,’ but better balance and viable alternatives would remove the excuses people hide behind to gatekeep in the first place.

tomofhyrule · September 23

This is precisely the problem: the mid-tier raiding community (which mostly consisted of social guilds and the like) who were most interested in hosting training trials have all but disappeared. The gap between the highest tier and the rest of the playerbase is massive.

And it’s all because the mid-tier left because they were frustrated with the Combat direction. Period. I’ve seen those guilds close. I was in some of them when the leaders hung it up and cited the balance ridiculousness specifically. You can look up Nefas’ video on YouTube - no matter what you think of him, his Project Vitality was really big at getting people into the raiding community, and it’s all gone now.

Blaming “toxic players” is blaming a symptom, not a cause. And forcing those high-level players to take people will only breed more discontent. What we need is for the mid-tier raiding community to come back, and that means that whatever drove them away needs to be addressed.

I see a lot of people in this thread complaining about toxic endgamers who don’t have a chance to prove themselves, so… go ahead and do it yourself. Instead of expecting someone to take you into the group, why don’t you start the group? Put it in the group finder as “training run, any builds allowed!” and you’ll definitely get people to come in. You can be the change you want to see, and allow anyone to join with any builds allowed they want. And then when you try to get in a different group, show off your achievement and bust with pride.

kargen27 · September 23

Asdara wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Asdara wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Nah it's bad players. There will always be a best set right up until they put us all in the same gear like the PvP tests that are happening. Then players will want to kick you for not running to next pull quick enough or standing in the wrong spot or who knows what. Those bad players are still going to be bad players.
What changes would make the bad players suddenly become decent?

its not "just bad player" prior to this year i've NEVER seen that many group in group finder actively refusing HA or onebar build.
If you want to stay on copium and say everything normal and its always been that way, well i can't pull you out of your cognitive dissonance.

See when you insult the messenger that tells me you don't have a legitimate response to the message. Again I ask what changes to the game would make these players with bad attitudes suddenly start acting decent?

Calling out copium isn’t an insult, it’s frustration at people pretending this has always been the same. It hasn’t. I’ve played since beta, and only recently have I seen HA and one-bar players consistently refused in group finder. That shift didn’t come out of nowhere, it came from design changes funneling everyone into one meta. No change will magically make every rude player ‘act decent,’ but better balance and viable alternatives would remove the excuses people hide behind to gatekeep in the first place.

Also played since Beta and remember standing outside a dungeon hoping to be picked up for a group only to be asked what armor and skills I had on. I remember guilds only allowing players to join groups after completing a parse on a specific boss before we had target dummies. Some groups required a player prove they finished vet Maelstrom Arena before allowing that player to join. Claimed it proved situational awareness and the ability to do the mechanics. Requiring certain sets or preformance proof has always been a part of the game because of the players that make those demands.
The one-bar builds are getting grief now because so many players posted them in social media as a quick easy way to get high numbers. That led to a lot of less experienced players using the build and believing the hype. Those that can use the build effective got caught up in the generalization of it being a crutch build for beginners. For a while the one bar build was the flavor of the month and now it is not. Not the games fault.
Almost any build is viable unless you are trying for a trifecta or a place on the leader board. Some players demand certain builds in their groups hoping the high DPS will allow them to ignore mechanics. Again that is a player problem not a game problem. There will always be a META and there will always be players that make demands even if the difference is minimal.

I'm all for better balance but better balance isn't going to fix the problem that is being addressed here.

Asdara · 12:42AM

kargen27 wrote: »

Asdara wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Asdara wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Nah it's bad players. There will always be a best set right up until they put us all in the same gear like the PvP tests that are happening. Then players will want to kick you for not running to next pull quick enough or standing in the wrong spot or who knows what. Those bad players are still going to be bad players.
What changes would make the bad players suddenly become decent?

its not "just bad player" prior to this year i've NEVER seen that many group in group finder actively refusing HA or onebar build.
If you want to stay on copium and say everything normal and its always been that way, well i can't pull you out of your cognitive dissonance.

See when you insult the messenger that tells me you don't have a legitimate response to the message. Again I ask what changes to the game would make these players with bad attitudes suddenly start acting decent?

Calling out copium isn’t an insult, it’s frustration at people pretending this has always been the same. It hasn’t. I’ve played since beta, and only recently have I seen HA and one-bar players consistently refused in group finder. That shift didn’t come out of nowhere, it came from design changes funneling everyone into one meta. No change will magically make every rude player ‘act decent,’ but better balance and viable alternatives would remove the excuses people hide behind to gatekeep in the first place.

Also played since Beta and remember standing outside a dungeon hoping to be picked up for a group only to be asked what armor and skills I had on. I remember guilds only allowing players to join groups after completing a parse on a specific boss before we had target dummies. Some groups required a player prove they finished vet Maelstrom Arena before allowing that player to join. Claimed it proved situational awareness and the ability to do the mechanics. Requiring certain sets or preformance proof has always been a part of the game because of the players that make those demands.
The one-bar builds are getting grief now because so many players posted them in social media as a quick easy way to get high numbers. That led to a lot of less experienced players using the build and believing the hype. Those that can use the build effective got caught up in the generalization of it being a crutch build for beginners. For a while the one bar build was the flavor of the month and now it is not. Not the games fault.
Almost any build is viable unless you are trying for a trifecta or a place on the leader board. Some players demand certain builds in their groups hoping the high DPS will allow them to ignore mechanics. Again that is a player problem not a game problem. There will always be a META and there will always be players that make demands even if the difference is minimal.

I'm all for better balance but better balance isn't going to fix the problem that is being addressed here.

I get what you’re saying, I was there too when people were already asking for specific sets or proof of performance before grouping. That kind of gatekeeping definitely isn’t new. But here’s the difference: back then, there were multiple viable paths. You could show skill or gear in different ways and still get picked up. Now, balance has narrowed things so much that the beam meta (and to a lesser degree one-bar HA) feel like the only ‘real’ option.

That’s why I keep saying this isn’t just a player problem. Players will always chase META, sure, but when design supports multiple equally viable play styles, that behavior doesn’t automatically turn into widespread exclusion. When design funnels everyone into one mold, it amplifies the gatekeeping and gives people ammo to say ‘your way is invalid.’

Toxicity and META-chasing will always exist, but the degree of it- how harsh it gets, how often it shows up even in casual content-is directly tied to whether design gives players options or forces them into one lane.

Before this year, I’d have said it was maybe 70% player/30% ZOS. But now? It feels more like 65% ZOS/35% player. The balance and set design decisions are directly fueling the environment we see today.

Alchimiste1 · 12:57AM

frogthroat wrote: »

Alchimiste1 wrote: »

Sorry, but I'm not going to carry a HA DD

But why? I neeeeed carry because it's late and I am too tired to do a second parse.

Edit: oh yeah, and this is practically one bar. Replace back bar crit surge with spell power potions and you never need to visit the back bar.

not even 120k, yeah sorry I'm not going to carry a HA DD

Pevey · 2:47AM

kargen27 wrote: »

Asdara wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Asdara wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Nah it's bad players. There will always be a best set right up until they put us all in the same gear like the PvP tests that are happening. Then players will want to kick you for not running to next pull quick enough or standing in the wrong spot or who knows what. Those bad players are still going to be bad players.
What changes would make the bad players suddenly become decent?

its not "just bad player" prior to this year i've NEVER seen that many group in group finder actively refusing HA or onebar build.
If you want to stay on copium and say everything normal and its always been that way, well i can't pull you out of your cognitive dissonance.

See when you insult the messenger that tells me you don't have a legitimate response to the message. Again I ask what changes to the game would make these players with bad attitudes suddenly start acting decent?

Calling out copium isn’t an insult, it’s frustration at people pretending this has always been the same. It hasn’t. I’ve played since beta, and only recently have I seen HA and one-bar players consistently refused in group finder. That shift didn’t come out of nowhere, it came from design changes funneling everyone into one meta. No change will magically make every rude player ‘act decent,’ but better balance and viable alternatives would remove the excuses people hide behind to gatekeep in the first place.

Also played since Beta and remember standing outside a dungeon hoping to be picked up for a group only to be asked what armor and skills I had on. I remember guilds only allowing players to join groups after completing a parse on a specific boss before we had target dummies. Some groups required a player prove they finished vet Maelstrom Arena before allowing that player to join. Claimed it proved situational awareness and the ability to do the mechanics. Requiring certain sets or preformance proof has always been a part of the game because of the players that make those demands.
The one-bar builds are getting grief now because so many players posted them in social media as a quick easy way to get high numbers. That led to a lot of less experienced players using the build and believing the hype. Those that can use the build effective got caught up in the generalization of it being a crutch build for beginners. For a while the one bar build was the flavor of the month and now it is not. Not the games fault.
Almost any build is viable unless you are trying for a trifecta or a place on the leader board. Some players demand certain builds in their groups hoping the high DPS will allow them to ignore mechanics. Again that is a player problem not a game problem. There will always be a META and there will always be players that make demands even if the difference is minimal.

I'm all for better balance but better balance isn't going to fix the problem that is being addressed here.

In any group sporting/gaming activity, there will be various levels of seriousness, from the most casual to the most elite. I have cousin whose kid was in a t-ball league that had no outs and no score-keeping. Innings were timed. All were welcomed, and there is definitely a need for that kind of environment to exist for those who want it. But her kid actually found the lack of structure and clear rules very confusing and frustrating. He quit and joined a more serious league. And then when kids get older, there are the regional travel teams, and then it funnels into the college teams, and then of course the pros. There are different requirements at each level, and the people themselves decide on that.

So, yes, there was "gatekeeping" even at the start of the game, and there always will be.

But I think that is not contradictory with the statement that more players then ever seem frustrated and "left out" of group content they would like to do, for the reasons some people above in this thread have stated. And I think that is down to the combat changes made over the years. The rules of the game matter. Having a balanced and diverse set of ways to approach content (with different playstyles) matters.

ZhuJiuyin · 3:39AM

frogthroat wrote: »

Let's throw some random numbers together. Let's say there's 2 dungeon dd's. One has meta and does 100k dps. Another has off-meta and does 75k dps. (For ease of calculations, % -> dps.) The boss has 10M health. No ads, tank keeps the boss all the time so dd's can simply parse.

They are done in 10,000,000 / (100,000 + 75,000) seconds. As in, 57 seconds.

Now, if both would do 100k dps, then the time spent on that boss would drop to... *drum roll* ...50 seconds.

(HM)Xoryn's Chain Lightning fires approximately every 15-20 seconds, depending on latency and boss actions. A 57-second (rounded to 60) chance of encountering up to 3-4 Chain Lightning fires is possible, while a 50-second chance of encountering up to 3 or at least 2 Chain Lightning fires is possible.

According to Eso logs, a fight with (HM)Xoryn takes about 3-4 minutes, depending on the team. However, no one would give up 12 Chain Lightning fires to face up to 16.

ZhuJiuyin · 3:54AM

frogthroat wrote: »

Alchimiste1 wrote: »

Sorry, but I'm not going to carry a HA DD

But why? I neeeeed carry because it's late and I am too tired to do a second parse.

Edit: oh yeah, and this is practically one bar. Replace back bar crit surge with spell power potions and you never need to visit the back bar.

98K, and area damage only accounts for about 40% of total DPS.

In contrast, any Arc/NB or DK or Templar can reach up to 120K up, with area damage accounting for 7-80% of total DPS. It also has self-healing (Cephaliarch's Flail), a shield (Fatecarver), and can achieve 125% critical damage and 18,200 pen without requiring a sup.

Any sane RL taking on a high-difficulty Trial would prefer the latter over the former.

frogthroat · 6:59AM

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

frogthroat wrote: »

Alchimiste1 wrote: »

Sorry, but I'm not going to carry a HA DD

But why? I neeeeed carry because it's late and I am too tired to do a second parse.

Edit: oh yeah, and this is practically one bar. Replace back bar crit surge with spell power potions and you never need to visit the back bar.

98K, and area damage only accounts for about 40% of total DPS.

In contrast, any Arc/NB or DK or Templar can reach up to 120K up, with area damage accounting for 7-80% of total DPS. It also has self-healing (Cephaliarch's Flail), a shield (Fatecarver), and can achieve 125% critical damage and 18,200 pen without requiring a sup.

Any sane RL taking on a high-difficulty Trial would prefer the latter over the former.

The discussion started with OP having a gatekeeping experience in vet pledge. The DLC pledge for that day was Dread Cellar.

If you read these comments, including my previous comments, absolutely no one is saying that there shouldn't be some choosing in the high-difficulty trials. In fact, in my previous comments I recommend it.

Believe it or not, but there's also other content than trial trifectas. Do you absolutely need a highly optimised group to complete the simple Dread Cellar HM?

Gabriel_H · 10:21AM

Treeshka wrote: »

I know i have posted something on this thread already but i would like to address this as well. Do you guys think this is gatekeeping or just high expectation? The boldest measures are the safest.

I call it too much watching YouTube.

Gabriel_H · 10:33AM

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Ok, and how do you propose to fix this? To force all groups to bring everyone regardless of their build? How do you propose to enforce this?

I'm simply pointing out the problem. The "fix" would be to alter mindsets, but that's never going to happen en-masse; and certainly not enforcing anything - enforcement being the problem.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Yes, there are a lot of players who play off-meta setups reasonably well. The fact still remains that the average and maximum potential of an off-meta build are still significantly lower than the average and maximum potential of an Arcbladeplar. And that’s just numbers.

And still not accounting for the player's ability to reach that maximum.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

To be honest, a lot of these “gatekeepy” players have been burned by people with off-meta builds before - I’ve seen plenty of people who proudly proclaim that “it’s okay that they have low DPS as long as they know mechanics!” while proceeding to botch every mechanic. Not to mention that there are a number of people who are convinced that their solo-everything build is perfect because they need their self heals and armor, conveniently forgetting that the point of group content is to have healers and tanks taking care of that for you so you can focus on damage.

How would you feel if someone came up to you and said “Hi, I’ve never met you but I don’t trust that you can do your job to heal me so I’m slotting self heals to keep myslef alive. Also I’m offended that people don’t trust me to do my job and are implying my damage is low.”

Not for nothing but there is a lot of group content where DDs should be speccing a self-heal. A dead DD does 0 dps.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Numbers also say that for the highest echelons of content (hard mode trials after Kyne’s), there honestly isn’t much wiggle room either - they’re balanced around groups which are able to put out obscene amounts of damage. And there, that “7 seconds of difference” is also the difference between a group wipe from Taleria’s mages being up too long and a clear.

The game has DPS checks, but those checks are not set at 100% of possible damage. There are also places where too much damage can lead to a wipe. That same content requires tanks and healers to be on point with their positioning - that's a player skill, not the power of their build.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

You’re never going to get rid of toxicity. Ever. But if there wasn’t such a huge gap between the top build and the next one, then people would be more used to seeing other ways than what the 0.0001% of players do. If the balance were better, people would be less gatekeepy.

I'm not denying the balance couldn't be better, I'm saying it's not strictly needed. Again, the game is not balanced around the 100% damage potential having 100% efficiency.