Pure classes should not be penalized

techprince · May 22

Pure classes shouldn’t be penalized for choosing not to multiclass. At a minimum, they should perform on par with multiclassed builds—if not exceed them. A balanced approach would be to evaluate the overall increase in damage or healing that multiclassing provides and compensate pure classes with a corresponding benefit called "Class Mastery." For instance, if multiclassing offers a 15% boost to damage or healing, then pure classes who keep all three skill lines could gain a passive "Class Mastery" bonus granting the same percentage boost.

Drazorious · May 22

I like this idea.

tsaescishoeshiner · May 22

I think this would give a disadvantage to many subclassing builds that aren't min-maxed, and punish people for experimenting with it. For example, if you want to try out a heal from a new class skill line, you would lose your passive monoclassing buff. Does not sound fun, although they should keep balancing single-class characters.

Subclassing isn't going to give an inherent boost--only some class combinations will with the right build. Single class builds will definitely outperform some subclassing builds.

I think there are some natural bonuses to monoclassing, namely having all the major buffs (Sorcery/Brutality, Resolve) without redundancies. For example, if you're an arcanist and you pick up sorcerer's Surge for the healing, you're paying extra magicka for Major Brutality/Sorcery because Surge is cost-budgeted based on providing that buff. For DPS, some classes have their ultimate-generation passive in a tank or heal skill line, so by swapping that out, you lose some ult. And of course, there will be some optimal subclass combinations for DPS that will outperform mono-class builds.

I think they've added a lot to each class to make sure it has all the buffs and tools, and hopefully they keep that up so that each base class is fully rounded out.

That said, maybe the idea for a passive buff for monoclassing would be a good idea for a Mythic item.

BretonMage · May 22

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

I think this would give a disadvantage to many subclassing builds that aren't min-maxed, and punish people for experimenting with it.

Non min-maxers are already at a considerable disadvantage compared to subclassed min-maxers. It goes back as always to ZOS needing to balance all possible builds properly. I don't think this is something that can be avoided.

They honestly should have just let us swap out one skill line, it would have kept some residual semblance of class identity, and made balancing less complex.

That said, maybe the idea for a passive buff for monoclassing would be a good idea for a Mythic item.

That would still penalise pure classes by forcing them to give up their current Mythic. If anything it should be a passive.

techprince · May 22

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

I think this would give a disadvantage to many subclassing builds that aren't min-maxed, and punish people for experimenting with it. For example, if you want to try out a heal from a new class skill line, you would lose your passive monoclassing buff. Does not sound fun, although they should keep balancing single-class characters.

Subclassing isn't going to give an inherent boost--only some class combinations will with the right build. Single class builds will definitely outperform some subclassing builds.

I think there are some natural bonuses to monoclassing, namely having all the major buffs (Sorcery/Brutality, Resolve) without redundancies. For example, if you're an arcanist and you pick up sorcerer's Surge for the healing, you're paying extra magicka for Major Brutality/Sorcery because Surge is cost-budgeted based on providing that buff. For DPS, some classes have their ultimate-generation passive in a tank or heal skill line, so by swapping that out, you lose some ult. And of course, there will be some optimal subclass combinations for DPS that will outperform mono-class builds.

I think they've added a lot to each class to make sure it has all the buffs and tools, and hopefully they keep that up so that each base class is fully rounded out.

That said, maybe the idea for a passive buff for monoclassing would be a good idea for a Mythic item.

You haven't seen PTS parses have you? Blows every solo class parses out there.

RandomKodiak · May 23

A 5%bonus for each base class skill line would be the easiest I think. At 10% for a "pure" class that would give Sorcs who now parse about the best at 140ish 154k which would still be behind the 170k +s we have been seeing a boost if they don't want to subclass. It would keep those who don't want to mess with it from falling too far behind but still reward those who want to min max and the score pushers. Most people playing this game are not going to magically be able to hit that 170, I know I can't parse that well but do agree that those that don't want this should not be punished as much as this is going to be without something. Just my two cents though.

Meiox · May 23

so you want that strong classes who don't realky need to subclass get a buff and weaker classes who need to subclass to come to the level of the stronger classes get a penalty ?

Stx · May 23

techprince wrote: »

Pure classes shouldn’t be penalized for choosing not to multiclass. At a minimum, they should perform on par with multiclassed builds—if not exceed them. A balanced approach would be to evaluate the overall increase in damage or healing that multiclassing provides and compensate pure classes with a corresponding benefit called "Class Mastery." For instance, if multiclassing offers a 15% boost to damage or healing, then pure classes who keep all three skill lines could gain a passive "Class Mastery" bonus granting the same percentage boost.

What would even be the point of subclassing then? You wouldn’t gain anything and give up utility / defense / sustain

techprince · May 23

Meiox wrote: »

so you want that strong classes who don't realky need to subclass get a buff and weaker classes who need to subclass to come to the level of the stronger classes get a penalty ?

Which are these "stronger classes" you mentioned?

Stx wrote: »

techprince wrote: »

Pure classes shouldn’t be penalized for choosing not to multiclass. At a minimum, they should perform on par with multiclassed builds—if not exceed them. A balanced approach would be to evaluate the overall increase in damage or healing that multiclassing provides and compensate pure classes with a corresponding benefit called "Class Mastery." For instance, if multiclassing offers a 15% boost to damage or healing, then pure classes who keep all three skill lines could gain a passive "Class Mastery" bonus granting the same percentage boost.

What would even be the point of subclassing then? You wouldn’t gain anything and give up utility / defense / sustain

Points of subclassing:
1) To use other class abilities without needing to level a seperate character.
2) To provide more variations of builds.

Thumbless_Bot · May 23

techprince wrote: »

Pure classes shouldn’t be penalized for choosing not to multiclass. At a minimum, they should perform on par with multiclassed builds—if not exceed them. A balanced approach would be to evaluate the overall increase in damage or healing that multiclassing provides and compensate pure classes with a corresponding benefit called "Class Mastery." For instance, if multiclassing offers a 15% boost to damage or healing, then pure classes who keep all three skill lines could gain a passive "Class Mastery" bonus granting the same percentage boost.

This is like saying I want adept rider to give me a special buff because i choose not to use Rele because i am into horse riding immersion.

You are choosing to nerf yourself. Maybe don't. That or live with the impact of your decisions on your gameplay.

I run stat builds that aren't meta. I dont ask zos for a special buff because I'm not using "proc" sets that are meta. I live with my decisions because it's how I choose to play.

techprince · May 23

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

techprince wrote: »

Pure classes shouldn’t be penalized for choosing not to multiclass. At a minimum, they should perform on par with multiclassed builds—if not exceed them. A balanced approach would be to evaluate the overall increase in damage or healing that multiclassing provides and compensate pure classes with a corresponding benefit called "Class Mastery." For instance, if multiclassing offers a 15% boost to damage or healing, then pure classes who keep all three skill lines could gain a passive "Class Mastery" bonus granting the same percentage boost.

This is like saying I want adept rider to give me a special buff because i choose not to use Rele because i am into horse riding immersion.

You are choosing to nerf yourself. Maybe don't. That or live with the impact of your decisions on your gameplay.

I run stat builds that aren't meta. I dont ask zos for a special buff because I'm not using "proc" sets that are meta. I live with my decisions because it's how I choose to play.

You are comparing apples to oranges. Pure class builds are significantly under performing as compared to multi classing. Your stat builds wont get you into DLC HM vTrials.

Stx · May 23

Of course they are. Pure class builds have one dps line vs subclassing having three. 😓

Pure classes also have two other trees which offer damage mitigation, effective health, sustain and recovery, self healing, utility, buffs, etc etc.

You can’t just ask for pure classes to have equal output to specialized subclasses with the wave of a magic wand kthnxbye. Subclassing would be dead on arrival.

There are a number of solutions to decreasing the gap between pure and subclasses players. But none of them are just a blanket buff to pures to make them equal to subclasses.

Thumbless_Bot · May 23

techprince wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

techprince wrote: »

Pure classes shouldn’t be penalized for choosing not to multiclass. At a minimum, they should perform on par with multiclassed builds—if not exceed them. A balanced approach would be to evaluate the overall increase in damage or healing that multiclassing provides and compensate pure classes with a corresponding benefit called "Class Mastery." For instance, if multiclassing offers a 15% boost to damage or healing, then pure classes who keep all three skill lines could gain a passive "Class Mastery" bonus granting the same percentage boost.

This is like saying I want adept rider to give me a special buff because i choose not to use Rele because i am into horse riding immersion.

You are choosing to nerf yourself. Maybe don't. That or live with the impact of your decisions on your gameplay.

I run stat builds that aren't meta. I dont ask zos for a special buff because I'm not using "proc" sets that are meta. I live with my decisions because it's how I choose to play.

You are comparing apples to oranges. Pure class builds are significantly under performing as compared to multi classing. Your stat builds wont get you into DLC HM vTrials.

We are saying the same thing. Except for the comparison of apples to oranges.

If someone wants to into dlc hm they have a choice. I bolded the reference to choice above intentionally.

You can chooooooooooose to run a single class or not. Or you can choooooooooose to run meta because you want to compete in dlc hm.

Opportunity Cost...

If I run Adept Rider I am making a choice.

You can play the way you want, but you cant get flawless conquerer if you choose not to equip armor or weapons because it goes against your gameplay fantasy. Same logic applies to the argument made by the poster.

tomofhyrule · May 23

Stx wrote: »

Of course they are. Pure class builds have one dps line vs subclassing having three. 😓

Pure classes also have two other trees which offer damage mitigation, effective health, sustain and recovery, self healing, utility, buffs, etc etc.

You can’t just ask for pure classes to have equal output to specialized subclasses with the wave of a magic wand kthnxbye. Subclassing would be dead on arrival.

There are a number of solutions to decreasing the gap between pure and subclasses players. But none of them are just a blanket buff to pures to make them equal to subclasses.

I see this argument a lot: "but pure-class builds have 1 DPS line and 1 tank line and 1 heal line, but a subclass has 3 DPS lines and no support lines! Obviously a pure build should not be able to do as high damage as a subclass one!"

Which is a fair argument. But it ignores two major elephants in the room.

Only the DLC Classes have strict role/line separation, and even that's muddles with things like Warden's tank line (which some people are desperately trying to make into a DPS line). The basegame classes are nowhere near strictly separated, and even have several lines where one skill can have a heal morph and a DPS morph.
You only get 12 skills across both bars, so people are already hyperfocusing into one role. No matter how many DPS lines you have (not to mention weapon and guild lines), that's not allowing you to get more skills.

Here's the major rebuttal: If it were true that a subclassed build that hyperfocused into damage should be doing more damage, then it logically follows that a pureclass build which allows a character to be able to damage, heal, and shield all with the same setup should be able to be better than a subclass build in places where one character needs to do all three roles, e.g. vMA or PvP. So why are pureclasses also worse than subclassed builds in those areas? After all, that's where you need to be able to do everything at once, so shouldn't that excel there?

Erickson9610 · May 23

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Here's the major rebuttal: If it were true that a subclassed build that hyperfocused into damage should be doing more damage, then it logically follows that a pureclass build which allows a character to be able to damage, heal, and shield all with the same setup should be able to be better than a subclass build in places where one character needs to do all three roles, e.g. vMA or PvP. So why are pureclasses also worse than subclassed builds in those areas? After all, that's where you need to be able to do everything at once, so shouldn't that excel there?

Because Subclassed builds don't always stack skill lines of the same kind. A Subclassed build can take skill lines with abilities for all three roles from different classes, since each class can do all three roles at varying degrees of effectiveness. For instance, Dragonknight is known for its tanking, Arcanist is known for its damage dealing, and Warden is known for its healing, for varying reasons — it could be their passives or functionality/scaling of their active abilities, which are different between classes.

At this point, yes, optimized Subclassed builds should always be better than Pureclass builds.

Unless every single class was changed to be homogeneous with one another — meaning every class has the same exact abilities shared between them, just with different colors — then some class will always be better than another at a particular role. Just look at Templar tanking (no in-kit pull, the gap closer taunts) compared to Dragonknight tanking (has an in-kit pull which is also a taunt) and you'll see that it's preferable to be a Dragonknight when tanking compared to being a Templar.

If there exists a better Pureclass build for a particular role than another Pureclass build for that role, then there will always be an advantage to Subclassing. Subclassing allows you to trade your suboptimal skill lines for optimal ones, even if every Pureclass build can technically fill any role.

tomofhyrule · May 24

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Here's the major rebuttal: If it were true that a subclassed build that hyperfocused into damage should be doing more damage, then it logically follows that a pureclass build which allows a character to be able to damage, heal, and shield all with the same setup should be able to be better than a subclass build in places where one character needs to do all three roles, e.g. vMA or PvP. So why are pureclasses also worse than subclassed builds in those areas? After all, that's where you need to be able to do everything at once, so shouldn't that excel there?

Because Subclassed builds don't always stack skill lines of the same kind. A Subclassed build can take skill lines with abilities for all three roles from different classes, since each class can do all three roles at varying degrees of effectiveness. For instance, Dragonknight is known for its tanking, Arcanist is known for its damage dealing, and Warden is known for its healing, for varying reasons — it could be their passives or functionality/scaling of their active abilities, which are different between classes.

At this point, yes, optimized Subclassed builds should always be better than Pureclass builds.

Unless every single class was changed to be homogeneous with one another — meaning every class has the same exact abilities shared between them, just with different colors — then some class will always be better than another at a particular role. Just look at Templar tanking (no in-kit pull, the gap closer taunts) compared to Dragonknight tanking (has an in-kit pull which is also a taunt) and you'll see that it's preferable to be a Dragonknight when tanking compared to being a Templar.

If there exists a better Pureclass build for a particular role than another Pureclass build for that role, then there will always be an advantage to Subclassing. Subclassing allows you to trade your suboptimal skill lines for optimal ones, even if every Pureclass build can technically fill any role.

And yet even above, we have people comparing "I'm keeping my classes pure!" to "I'm going to wear Adept Rider in content!"

Look, the fact that we're looking at "pure class" being on the level of "idiot picking three random class lines" suggests that the balance for this is way out of whack. The pure classes are supposed to be reasonable. I can agree that some sweaty min-max build should outclass a pure class, but pure classes should easily outclass 'pick any three random lines with no rhyme or reason' simply because that's the default (and you have to play pure class until you hit level 50 at least once).

That's what people are salty about. If a min-maxed Subclass was about 5-10% better than a pure class, that makes sense and nobody would have an issue. But to have a pure class build be about 25% behind where they are live (so you're losing power due to nerfs) and then being at least 50% behind Subclassed builds suggests that the balance is not appropriate at all. And how is this gonna get fixed? Nerf the skills... which means that pure classes are getting nerfed even harder for no reason.

What ZOS should have done was to first balance the skill lines among themselves, and then they could let people mix them so there isn't an absurd power delta like we have now. Because if we're at the point where "I don't like Subclassing" and "I'm making a total BS for fun RP build!" are the same thing... that's indicative of really bad balancing.

gc0018 · May 24

Even if ZOS agree with your idea, they won't take it at the moment. ZOS need to force players to play subclassing at the very beginning so
1) they can harvest data for the subclassing system;
2) they can claim the system is a huge success because a decent amount of players are using it;
3) adding the bonus to pure class can attract some players back to the game, so they have no need to play all the cards at the same time. New patch is good enough to make profits. They will use this card when player number drops.

ESO_Nightingale · May 24

This is a much better idea than nerfing the power level of subclassed skill lines. I approve.

moderatelyfatman · May 24

Given how well ZOS balanced stamina and magicka builds vs hybridisation, I'm sure we have nothing to fear.

Maggusemm · May 24

Class mastery proposal:

pure class: +6% damage and +6% regeneration for mag, stam, health
one subclassed line: +3 % damage and +3 % reg
two subclassed lines: zero

the1andonlyskwex · May 24

A simpler option would be to just change a whole bunch of the passives to only buff their own class's abilities. So, for example, Nightblade's Pressure Points and Hemorrhage passives (both from the Assassination skill line) could be changed to only apply to Nightblade abilities. Making similar mods to two or three passives from each skill line would probably be enough to balance things out without introducing additional subclass-specific systems.

Erickson9610 · May 24

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

A simpler option would be to just change a whole bunch of the passives to only buff their own class's abilities. So, for example, Nightblade's Pressure Points and Hemorrhage passives (both from the Assassination skill line) could be changed to only apply to Nightblade abilities. Making similar mods to two or three passives from each skill line would probably be enough to balance things out without introducing additional subclass-specific systems.

That would nerf pure classes who prefer to use non-Class abilities. For instance, passives like Amplitude or Balanced Warrior work on all abilities, so pure classes who rely on Weapon abilities will have those abilities nerfed by that change.