I am actually relieved

coop500 · May 5

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

VoidCommander · May 5

Yeah after watching skinnycheek’s video, it looks like they did take in a lot of feedback. The only major thing that was left out and frankly requires more time to consider is the rearranging of skills into other skill lines.

That is currently too big a problem to solve for THIS pts cycle, but I think they will have time to address it based on data they collect for these next few months.

Soarora · May 5

I’m glad everything wasn’t mass nerfed like I expected but new content does get balanced around the damage capabilities of the time.

licenturion · May 5

VoidCommander wrote: »

That is currently too big a problem to solve for THIS pts cycle, but I think they will have time to address it based on data they collect for these next few months.

Exactly. It seems some people want them to balance against a new meta that doesn't exist yet.

When something vastly overperforms on live in June they will probably address it quickly.

sarahthes · May 5

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

Pearls was mandatory from the HM trial level up, usually for both healers. Nerfing it is a (probably necessary) DPS loss to endgame. Combining it with pillagers nerf and endgame group dps power creep will probably go from 40% to 10-20%.

ZOS_Kevin · May 5

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

Celas_Dranacea · May 5

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

Ty for the update @ZOS_Kevin , and ty for calling out werewolves Coop. Werewolf players are quite concerned that we will be even further behind in both PVP / PVE metas with subclassing and we hope this will be addressed. I'd also like to see a version of werewolf make it into Vengeance testing sooner than later.

coop500 · May 5

Celas_Dranacea wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

Ty for the update @ZOS_Kevin , and ty for calling out werewolves Coop. Werewolf players are quite concerned that we will be even further behind in both PVP / PVE metas with subclassing and we hope this will be addressed. I'd also like to see a version of werewolf make it into Vengeance testing sooner than later.

Yeah, werewolf is one of my favorite playstyles too, and it is already considered pretty weak on Live. It's only gonna be worse now, which is a shame.

But thank you @ZOS_Kevin for checking in. Subclassing opened up a whole new world, and the journey is gonna be rocky. Here's to hoping that, by the end, both subclassed builds and singular class builds will be viable.

icapital · May 5

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

please address the new UI and the concerns around it's aesthetics. those of us who find the new UI to be ugly need a way to revert to the original one.

Sparklezz42 · May 5

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

I may have missed this, as I haven't read the latest patch notes yet. But will there be some sort of special buff to the players that would like to remain a pure class? Would there be any sort of bonus to help those of us that don't want to partake in subclassing?

Deimus · May 5

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

@ZOS_Kevin just in case it was missed in the Combat & Abilities feedback thread or the other threads posted during the PTS could you pass along the issue of Necromancer skills that consume multiple corpses being nerfed indirectly in PvP due to the 5 pet limit and corpses counting as pets? This is what we're talking about:

Animate Blastbones - A 33% damage reduction.
Bitter Harvest and morphs - 67% reduction in duration of HoT, ultimate generated, and Major Protection. You will have to swap to your backbar every 7 seconds if you want to keep it active.
Enduring Undeath - 60% reduction in HoT duration.
Necromancer Class Mastery - 80% reduction in boost given to health, magicka, and stamina pools. Leaving just a 4% boost to your attribute resources that you can gain.

These will be the reductions players who use Blastbones, Skeletal Minion, and Spirit Mender get from those skills with the PvP pet limit without relying on dead players or npcs if they are close enough. This is a huge blow to players that want to play into the minion fantasy of a Necromancer. Even if a Necromancer player only used corpses generated from Flaming Skull, Grave Grasp, and Bone Armor it would be impossible with the 5 corpse limit to reach the maximum amount of corpses Bitter Harvest can consume or the Class Mastery.

It's not just punishing to players who want to play a pure class either. 2/3 Necro will still be affected and it will make subclassing into Bone Tyrant and Living Death very unappealing as you will have skills in those lines that you can't utilize efficiently from a lack of consistent corpse generators and even if you did have the generation in PvP the 5 pet limit cap will ensure you still can't effectively use the skill.

Having corpses count as just visual effects instead of pets or whatever the classification for Arcanist's crux are. If that isn't possible altering the duration and power of skills that consume multiple corpses to match the imposed limitations. All skills that consume multiple corpses should reach their max power or duration from absorbing 2-3 corpses in PvP if this change goes through. For the class mastery the percentages could be front-loaded, but still require 10 corpses to max out so you could get a 10% attribute buff with 3-4 corpses, but still require 10 corpses for the full 20% which you'd have to source from dead players or npcs.

Regardless of if these changes to corpse consumers were intentional or accidental communicating that you guys are aware of this would better than the feeling of having our class receive huge negative combat changes that are not clearly stated in the patch notes and Necromancer players continuously testing the mic to see if any of these concerns are reaching anybody.

ADarklore · May 5

Sparklezz42 wrote: »

I may have missed this, as I haven't read the latest patch notes yet. But will there be some sort of special buff to the players that would like to remain a pure class? Would there be any sort of bonus to help those of us that don't want to partake in subclassing?

Why would there be? You are not being 'forced' into subclassing, and if you have a group leader that demands it, find a new group. In reality, it's the PLAYERS who are causing all these problems by allowing min/maxers and meta chasers to dictate how they play. If players stopped allowing this to happen, if people stopped participating in their groups, they wouldn't have this kind of power. But as long as players give them power and control to dictate group terms, this will always be a problem, and has been a problem for most of ESO's existence. No matter a class added, a skill or class buffed, suddenly everyone is chasing that new BiS, that new meta... but it's not the devs fault, again, it's the players themselves that have allowed this to happen.

Joy_Division · May 5

ADarklore wrote: »

Sparklezz42 wrote: »

I may have missed this, as I haven't read the latest patch notes yet. But will there be some sort of special buff to the players that would like to remain a pure class? Would there be any sort of bonus to help those of us that don't want to partake in subclassing?

Why would there be? You are not being 'forced' into subclassing, and if you have a group leader that demands it, find a new group. In reality, it's the PLAYERS who are causing all these problems by allowing min/maxers and meta chasers to dictate how they play. If players stopped allowing this to happen, if people stopped participating in their groups, they wouldn't have this kind of power. But as long as players give them power and control to dictate group terms, this will always be a problem, and has been a problem for most of ESO's existence. No matter a class added, a skill or class buffed, suddenly everyone is chasing that new BiS, that new meta... but it's not the devs fault, again, it's the players themselves that have allowed this to happen.

Because this isn't so easy. If I played with people for years and we don;t like the feeling of wiping constantly on a boss, it's takes a pretty independently minded person who just doesn't mind tossing away social relationships to say, "Yeah, I'm not going to run with you folks anymore."

In theory, sure, maybe find new friends that don't impose certain baseline prerequisites. Maybe you now have new friends. Maybe. Or maybe you just willingly choose to distance yourself from people who you genuinely enjoyed their company ... only to find out your new friends kind of don't like wiping on bosses either and you get taken aside and they say, "Hey, I noticed on the logs that your DPS was lowest in the group and would you mind ..." So, you go looking for another group...

I can say from a PvP perspective, I was only ever in one group who didn't not make any semi unspoken requirements (or "demands") and that group was, to be diplomatic, not competitive. So, cool, they're all about playing what they want. But it really stinks when you constantly lose and hear the snide remarks from other people how uncompetitive that group is. It's one thing to ignore the "meta" in a single player scenario. But if you're in a PvP battleground or in a progression PvE group, you've got a whole team counting on you. I'm not sure "demand" is the word I would use for the expectations that come with talking up a slot on a team.

Maybe I am too competitive, but I'm changing my class lines if it means not wiping on trial bosses or other PvP groups. I am not being "controlled" by my group leader. I am being pushed along a path because of a competitive drive, sustaining social relations, and avoiding the unpleasant feeling of banging my head against a wall when there just happens to be a door within easy reach.

Sparklezz42 · May 6

ADarklore wrote: »

Sparklezz42 wrote: »

I may have missed this, as I haven't read the latest patch notes yet. But will there be some sort of special buff to the players that would like to remain a pure class? Would there be any sort of bonus to help those of us that don't want to partake in subclassing?

Why would there be? You are not being 'forced' into subclassing, and if you have a group leader that demands it, find a new group. In reality, it's the PLAYERS who are causing all these problems by allowing min/maxers and meta chasers to dictate how they play. If players stopped allowing this to happen, if people stopped participating in their groups, they wouldn't have this kind of power. But as long as players give them power and control to dictate group terms, this will always be a problem, and has been a problem for most of ESO's existence. No matter a class added, a skill or class buffed, suddenly everyone is chasing that new BiS, that new meta... but it's not the devs fault, again, it's the players themselves that have allowed this to happen.

I'm not asking this in regards to any person or group other than my own curiosity. As an overall statement, it appears that it won't be worth it to remain a pure class anymore. It seems that we'd have to subclass to compete with meta in both PvE and PvP. It's a neat feature that they're adding, right? But for those of us that don't want to subclass, will we basically be screwed against other players that do subclass? That's what I'm trying to hint at is all. Curious if this aspect has been looked at.

But again, I haven't been able to read through all the patch notes just yet.

Soarora · May 6

ADarklore wrote: »

Sparklezz42 wrote: »

I may have missed this, as I haven't read the latest patch notes yet. But will there be some sort of special buff to the players that would like to remain a pure class? Would there be any sort of bonus to help those of us that don't want to partake in subclassing?

Why would there be? You are not being 'forced' into subclassing, and if you have a group leader that demands it, find a new group. In reality, it's the PLAYERS who are causing all these problems by allowing min/maxers and meta chasers to dictate how they play. If players stopped allowing this to happen, if people stopped participating in their groups, they wouldn't have this kind of power. But as long as players give them power and control to dictate group terms, this will always be a problem, and has been a problem for most of ESO's existence. No matter a class added, a skill or class buffed, suddenly everyone is chasing that new BiS, that new meta... but it's not the devs fault, again, it's the players themselves that have allowed this to happen.

Yes and no. Would you rather prog a clear over the course of 8 months or 4 months? How many resets on a 15-minute fight can you take?

sans-culottes · May 6

ADarklore wrote: »

Sparklezz42 wrote: »

I may have missed this, as I haven't read the latest patch notes yet. But will there be some sort of special buff to the players that would like to remain a pure class? Would there be any sort of bonus to help those of us that don't want to partake in subclassing?

Why would there be? You are not being 'forced' into subclassing, and if you have a group leader that demands it, find a new group. In reality, it's the PLAYERS who are causing all these problems by allowing min/maxers and meta chasers to dictate how they play. If players stopped allowing this to happen, if people stopped participating in their groups, they wouldn't have this kind of power. But as long as players give them power and control to dictate group terms, this will always be a problem, and has been a problem for most of ESO's existence. No matter a class added, a skill or class buffed, suddenly everyone is chasing that new BiS, that new meta... but it's not the devs fault, again, it's the players themselves that have allowed this to happen.

Respectfully, if your entire engagement with the game is solo PvE questing, then the downstream effects of subclassing on group composition, role signaling, or balance might not be immediately visible to you. That’s not a criticism but an observation that different playstyles expose different fault lines. Those of us who do group or veteran content are raising concerns not out of “meta chasing,” but because subclassing rewires assumptions that structured gameplay used to rely on.

Zyaneth_Bal · May 6

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

It’s funny how they choose to answer here but ignore countless valuable feedback and justified concerns.
Doing their best to not notice any criticism when all players are trying to do is to actually help

sans-culottes · May 6

Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

It’s funny how they choose to answer here but ignore countless valuable feedback and justified concerns.
Doing their best to not notice any criticism when all players are trying to do is to actually help

It’s telling, isn’t it? Just like the yearslong refusal to engage with deeply rooted class feedback—sorry, I mean skill line feedback. The pattern here is selective engagement dressed up as transparency.

SaintJohnHM · May 6

Zyaneth_Bal wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

It’s funny how they choose to answer here but ignore countless valuable feedback and justified concerns.
Doing their best to not notice any criticism when all players are trying to do is to actually help

Yep, it's obvious they have no intention of listening or interacting to understand why multiclassing is making the game garbage to a lot of folks.

Destai · May 6

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

First thanks for your note here. This is helpful. Just want to flag that our goal is to bring things inline with subclassing while still allowing players to be powerful. We are taking feedback seriously and understand not everything will be perfect going into the update. But we hope that enough concerns were addressed leading into subclassing. We will continue to take a look feedback over the next two weeks and after U46 is out as well.

So then serious question - why aren't the devs active on the forums in what's the biggest combat change the game's ever seen. Don't you think that back-and-forth would help this first iteration go smoother? Feel like that should've been a big takeaway from U35 and its reaction.

autocookies · May 6

deleted

alpha_synuclein · May 6

sarahthes wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

Pearls was mandatory from the HM trial level up, usually for both healers. Nerfing it is a (probably necessary) DPS loss to endgame. Combining it with pillagers nerf and endgame group dps power creep will probably go from 40% to 10-20%.

While I agree that the damage we see on pts is quite crazy, nerfing it through support sets is not the way.
From PVE point of view I am more okay with nerfing individual skills/passives than group comps. Devaluing group effort is the worst thing they can do in multiplayer game.

sarahthes · May 6

alpha_synuclein wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

Pearls was mandatory from the HM trial level up, usually for both healers. Nerfing it is a (probably necessary) DPS loss to endgame. Combining it with pillagers nerf and endgame group dps power creep will probably go from 40% to 10-20%.

While I agree that the damage we see on pts is quite crazy, nerfing it through support sets is not the way.
From PVE point of view I am more okay with nerfing individual skills/passives than group comps. Devaluing group effort is the worst thing they can do in multiplayer game.

To my eyes, it was a fast way to rein in group power without dropping individual class power.

alpha_synuclein · May 6

sarahthes wrote: »

alpha_synuclein wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

Pearls was mandatory from the HM trial level up, usually for both healers. Nerfing it is a (probably necessary) DPS loss to endgame. Combining it with pillagers nerf and endgame group dps power creep will probably go from 40% to 10-20%.

While I agree that the damage we see on pts is quite crazy, nerfing it through support sets is not the way.
From PVE point of view I am more okay with nerfing individual skills/passives than group comps. Devaluing group effort is the worst thing they can do in multiplayer game.

To my eyes, it was a fast way to rein in group power without dropping individual class power.

Indeed. But its the individual power of (sub)classes that's causing issues.

sarahthes · May 6

alpha_synuclein wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

alpha_synuclein wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

Pearls was mandatory from the HM trial level up, usually for both healers. Nerfing it is a (probably necessary) DPS loss to endgame. Combining it with pillagers nerf and endgame group dps power creep will probably go from 40% to 10-20%.

While I agree that the damage we see on pts is quite crazy, nerfing it through support sets is not the way.
From PVE point of view I am more okay with nerfing individual skills/passives than group comps. Devaluing group effort is the worst thing they can do in multiplayer game.

To my eyes, it was a fast way to rein in group power without dropping individual class power.

Indeed. But its the individual power of (sub)classes that's causing issues.

They have outright said they don't want to touch that. Not that I agree with their approach. But if they aren't touching the classes themselves then they have to nerf the tools they use instead.

alpha_synuclein · May 6

sarahthes wrote: »

alpha_synuclein wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

alpha_synuclein wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

Pearls was mandatory from the HM trial level up, usually for both healers. Nerfing it is a (probably necessary) DPS loss to endgame. Combining it with pillagers nerf and endgame group dps power creep will probably go from 40% to 10-20%.

While I agree that the damage we see on pts is quite crazy, nerfing it through support sets is not the way.
From PVE point of view I am more okay with nerfing individual skills/passives than group comps. Devaluing group effort is the worst thing they can do in multiplayer game.

To my eyes, it was a fast way to rein in group power without dropping individual class power.

Indeed. But its the individual power of (sub)classes that's causing issues.

They have outright said they don't want to touch that. Not that I agree with their approach. But if they aren't touching the classes themselves then they have to nerf the tools they use instead.

Based on what they did to Azure I was hoping that they will at least focus on damage tools. My mistake ;(

ADarklore · May 7

My question is this... people say they ignore feedback, but who are the sources of that feedback? I mean, ZOS has their internal data which shows them exactly what they need to see. They get the numbers directly from how the players are interacting on PTS. Then you also have to consider who their target market is? And I'm thinking it's not the scoreboard chasers or min/maxers. It seems they are taking a page out of D4's playbook when they decided to, 'Just let them have fun and go wild'. Do you know it brought in a HUGE number of players back to the game... and when they decided to nerf things and bring things back into 'balance' a HUGE number of players left again. Perhaps there is something to that.

StarOfElyon · May 7

coop500 wrote: »

It might be crazy, I dunno, but I was so so worried that ZOS would mass nerf everything and all my characters would be garbage and forced into subclassing just to get their power back. But thankfully, this did not happen.

Do I have complaints? Of course. Like wishing werewolf wasn't completely forgotten, and wondering why they nerfed pearls, a mythic I never even seen discussed. And feeling like the new UI is ugly as heck.

But all in all, as someone who tries to balance my characters to be effective, but also fitting into what I personally imagine them to use ( because they are characters to me and not just builds) I am happy the game isn't being balanced around the top 5% that will always be OP no matter what.

As it stands, my characters are largely going to be just fine if I want to leave them as-is, or if I want to play with subclassing, I can!

Must be nice. They got my cro.

sans-culottes · May 7

ADarklore wrote: »

My question is this... people say they ignore feedback, but who are the sources of that feedback? I mean, ZOS has their internal data which shows them exactly what they need to see. They get the numbers directly from how the players are interacting on PTS. Then you also have to consider who their target market is? And I'm thinking it's not the scoreboard chasers or min/maxers. It seems they are taking a page out of D4's playbook when they decided to, 'Just let them have fun and go wild'. Do you know it brought in a HUGE number of players back to the game... and when they decided to nerf things and bring things back into 'balance' a HUGE number of players left again. Perhaps there is something to that.

@ADarklore, you keep invoking internal metrics and Diablo IV like they’re trump cards, but let’s be honest: this isn’t a data-driven argument. It’s vibes.

First, your Diablo IV comparison doesn’t hold. You still choose a fixed class in D4. You don’t get to bolt Necromancer onto Barbarian just because “it’s fun.” The game gives you robust identity and clear boundaries. And those boundaries are what give the game its flavor and structure. There’s no hybrid Sorcerer-Druid-Minion-Zookeeper experiment there, because Blizzard understands that “freedom” without coherence isn’t freedom, it’s noise.

Second, internal data is only as useful as the questions you ask it to answer. If ZOS wants to see whether people click on subclass combos, then sure, they’ll get that. But that tells you nothing about whether players find those combinations meaningful, balanced, or worth sticking with past novelty. PTS click data doesn’t measure long-term engagement or artistic integrity. It tracks reactions, not satisfaction.

Finally, the “just let them go wild and have fun” defense falls flat when it means turning class design into a cafeteria tray of mismatched abilities. That’s not fun. That’s fatigue. Players aren’t returning to subclassing because it’s innovative. They’re returning to poke at the wreckage.

tomofhyrule · May 7

ADarklore wrote: »

My question is this... people say they ignore feedback, but who are the sources of that feedback? I mean, ZOS has their internal data which shows them exactly what they need to see. They get the numbers directly from how the players are interacting on PTS. Then you also have to consider who their target market is? And I'm thinking it's not the scoreboard chasers or min/maxers. It seems they are taking a page out of D4's playbook when they decided to, 'Just let them have fun and go wild'. Do you know it brought in a HUGE number of players back to the game... and when they decided to nerf things and bring things back into 'balance' a HUGE number of players left again. Perhaps there is something to that.

These arguments come up a lot, and all it does is serve to pit the casual and sweaty (and PvP) playerbases against each other.

From your sig, you say you’re a “strictly solo PvE player.” So honest question: do you really care about what happens in the sweaty worlds? Or do you think that only solo PvE is relevant and other ways to play can just die off for all you care?

A lot of people prefer a compromise solution that could help both playerbases. The common things people are suggesting involve adding a small power penalty in exchange for multiclassing (which wouldn’t really affect solo PvE much since players doing hardcore RP don’t see high-level combat, and solo arena/IA PvE would then have flex their RPG muscles to choose between power or versatility as opposed to lots of buffs vs nerfs). Another suggestion was to allow unlimited Subclassing (remember, Subclassing does still have limits that you can’t trade away all three lines and you can’t take more than one line from another Class) but only in overland and normals. Again, the casual players would be able to go wild for questing and world bosses and the like, but then the competitive modes are not shackled to an even more oppressive meta.

I’m not against Subclassing, and I am very happy that other players will have the freedom they want. But my issue is that I build my characters around their Classes, and as such Subclassing them breaks my personal lore. True, I don’t need to Subclass, which I won’t unless my raid lead tells me to… but even then my sustain was nerfed by 50% because someone else might have a broken combo with another Class line. That feels like I’m being punished for wanting my fire-and-rock themed lawful good character to… not give up his fire skills and take up necromancy.

That’s what the problem is. Nerf the problematic combos, not the lines themselves. Don’t screw over people who want to play the way they want when the way they want to play is “I like my original Class lines, but thanks.”

sans-culottes · May 7

tomofhyrule wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

My question is this... people say they ignore feedback, but who are the sources of that feedback? I mean, ZOS has their internal data which shows them exactly what they need to see. They get the numbers directly from how the players are interacting on PTS. Then you also have to consider who their target market is? And I'm thinking it's not the scoreboard chasers or min/maxers. It seems they are taking a page out of D4's playbook when they decided to, 'Just let them have fun and go wild'. Do you know it brought in a HUGE number of players back to the game... and when they decided to nerf things and bring things back into 'balance' a HUGE number of players left again. Perhaps there is something to that.

These arguments come up a lot, and all it does is serve to pit the casual and sweaty (and PvP) playerbases against each other.

From your sig, you say you’re a “strictly solo PvE player.” So honest question: do you really care about what happens in the sweaty worlds? Or do you think that only solo PvE is relevant and other ways to play can just die off for all you care?

A lot of people prefer a compromise solution that could help both playerbases. The common things people are suggesting involve adding a small power penalty in exchange for multiclassing (which wouldn’t really affect solo PvE much since players doing hardcore RP don’t see high-level combat, and solo arena/IA PvE would then have flex their RPG muscles to choose between power or versatility as opposed to lots of buffs vs nerfs). Another suggestion was to allow unlimited Subclassing (remember, Subclassing does still have limits that you can’t trade away all three lines and you can’t take more than one line from another Class) but only in overland and normals. Again, the casual players would be able to go wild for questing and world bosses and the like, but then the competitive modes are not shackled to an even more oppressive meta.

I’m not against Subclassing, and I am very happy that other players will have the freedom they want. But my issue is that I build my characters around their Classes, and as such Subclassing them breaks my personal lore. True, I don’t need to Subclass, which I won’t unless my raid lead tells me to… but even then my sustain was nerfed by 50% because someone else might have a broken combo with another Class line. That feels like I’m being punished for wanting my fire-and-rock themed lawful good character to… not give up his fire skills and take up necromancy.

That’s what the problem is. Nerf the problematic combos, not the lines themselves. Don’t screw over people who want to play the way they want when the way they want to play is “I like my original Class lines, but thanks.”

This is a fair question, and your reading of the situation seems spot on.

The individual in question has made their position quite clear in another thread:

ADarklore wrote: »

Personally... I quest, run dolmens, level alts. Basically, I play ESO as intended- as 'Skyrim with friends' albeit without the 'friends'.

Which is fine, of course. But it does raise the issue: if you only engage with the most casual solo content, then why assert a position on game-wide balance decisions that affect systems far beyond that scope?

It’s precisely this type of selective engagement—combined with sweeping claims about ZOS’s intent and “target market”—that makes genuine feedback hard to sort. No one’s gatekeeping casual playstyles. But if someone’s experience stops at dolmens and delves, then it’s worth asking whether they’re in a position to declare what “the data” say about trials, PvP, or high-end performance balance.