Official Discussion Thread for "ESO’s Developers Share Subclassing System Secrets"

cuddles_with_wroble · May 29

disky wrote: »

Pixiepumpkin wrote: »

disky wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

OldStygian wrote: »

Classes should only exist in so far as they are predefined skill line selections.

We should be able to freely choose 3 skill lines on our toons when we create them.
.

since theyve offered no balance system in relation to the original classes this would seem to be their goal. Get rid of classes altogether at some point and just let players make their own. Certainly not a bad thing. More elder scrolls, less generic mmo.

Call me casual, but as someone who has played TES games for 25 years, I've always built my own class based on how I wanted to play and so this change feels very right to me. I spend a lot of time on builds that feels both on-theme and moderately effective, but I'm not here to min-max. That being said, to those crying doom over the "end of class identity" or the dissolution of whatever they believed to be a state of balance, I think this should be taken as an opportunity to re-*** things in a positive way. It may take a little time, but ZOS intends to ensure that everything will feel good.

There's a lot of valid criticism going around but ever since the beta I was annoyed by the restrictions that classes placed on a player and I'm very glad to see them fall away somewhat.

Edit: The censored word I used above is a normal barkeeping term, and also commonly used to describe a scenario in which something is shaken up. It's fine.

1. This is a multiplayer game, not a single player. This is why classes were created AND NECESSARY for balance.
2. It's disrespectful and dishonest to dismiss people concerned about class identity and balance who have not only shown severe concern over the implementation of subclassing, but tested it on the PTS and proven the community correct. Sublassing absolutely decimates balance in the game.

If you have studied people in raids/trials for the past 20 years or so, then you soon realize that weak DPS often get the boot. It is expected by most raid leaders and the community at large to be able to pull your weight in a raid.

Theorycrafters will find the optiimal build (not much different than now) and expect players to run this build if they intend on being brought along to a trial/raid.

The difference between now and post subclassing ESO is multifaceted.
• On live, classes can be balanced to ensure every player has the opportunity to accel based on what they play. After subclassing, this goes out the window meaning if a player intends to play a pure sorc...LOL good luck finding a group that will carry you.
• Class identity is gone, destroyed, obliterated, non-existent. There is no way to tell what another player is playing after subclassing. This is imporant in PVP where its necessary to understand how the enemy class is played. After subclassing, its a free for all.
• Once the "meta" is discovered (already has been), people are going to be expected to run this to run raids and due to the power differential being huge between a tuned subclass and a "normal" pure class build, you now have even LESS chance of being brought along.

The biggest turn off for me regarding ESO are two things.
1. ZOS moderation
2. Players harassing and abusing other players who do not "pull their weight" in vets, even when the player who is doing less DPS exceeds the threshold necessary to run the vet. Due to the 4 person party, its pretty obvious which DPS is not doing as good when you are the DPS doing 80% of the damage. The issue is people look at % not actual values of damage being done in conjunction with what is neccesary to do the content.

This issue, just got multipled by a massive factor with subclassing. People are already soloing vet march of sacrifices with it, something many folks can barely do right now with 4 people in game even if they understand the mechanics.

Subclassing and the multitude of build options are an illusion because folks who play with other people, especially strangers, are going to be expected to run a strong build.

There is literally more build diversity right now in game than there will be post subclassing, and its because the lack of being able to balance subclassing will result in people playing 1 build, vs a handfull on live.

People have always been expected to run a strong build in every group PvE scenario. Things are different now in a couple of ways:

- It will take a little while for balance to be sorted out due to this very significant change to the game.
- It may take somewhat longer to get to the build that suits your ideal group PvE setup.

That being said, I do recall players complaining about Arcanist outdoing basically every other class in PvE for a while before this was announced, and there were no doubt similar complaints prior to the existence of Arcanist for other issues. That will never stop. ZOS will never be able to create a perfectly balanced game, and they can't build a completely static game that never changes because it would become boring and people would stop playing. So the only choice is to do something new and interesting and hope people like it, and smooth things over with those who don't over time as the new system reaches a greater degree of balance.

I think one thing to consider is that this is such a big change that there will be a lot of new ideas coming to buildcraft for PvE, and we aren't going to figure out what's best right away. That sounds really fun and interesting to me. It's like New Game+ for ESO. Obviously there are players who like things as they were, but as previously stated, I just don't think an MMO can or should remain the same as the years go by. It's not good for the players and it's not good for the studio.

Change is an inherent part of the MMO experience. The game is supposed to evolve and improve, and I get that some people don't like what they're seeing now with subclassing and some of the critical feedback is certainly valid, but it's not as if it's going to stay that way forever. That feedback should be listened to and acted upon, but this feature, to me, feels like it's a step closer to the build freedom that TES games have always provided, and I never expected to see anything like it in ESO. I know we disagree but my interest isn't diminished just because it may make things a little more challenging to manage at release.

Edit: I should say this because I didn't really state it clearly - I disagree that classes are necessary for balance and I disagree that class identity should make a difference. The argument you're making is based on test server findings and speculation. None of what you've experienced is set in stone and the entire purpose of a PTS is to get feedback and make changes in the first place. It is good to speak up when you see a problem but I'm just kind of tired of people dooming about any change they deem somewhat significant, especially when they haven't even really experienced it.

the issue is that ZoS has a track record of ignoring PTS feedback and going live with things anyway, this is how they act like 95% of the time actually

the reason you see so many doomers and people preaching the end is bcs from our own lived exp we naturally assume that ZoS will launch the update in a broken state and then never fix the issues, just as the have a million times in the past.

the trust between the devs and the players is mostly gone due to their silence and actions

tomofhyrule · May 29

disky wrote: »

That feedback should be listened to and acted upon, but this feature, to me, feels like it's a step closer to the build freedom that TES games have always provided, and I never expected to see anything like it in ESO. I know we disagree but my interest isn't diminished just because it may make things a little more challenging to manage at release.

Let me address this point specifically, because I'm getting tired of seeing "oh, people who don't think Subclassing is the best thing ever obviously aren't Elder Scrolls fans, because every Elder Scrolls fan thinks this is the best thing ever!"

When I play Skyrim (or Oblivion, or even Morrowind since I've been a fan of the series since then), I always had the choice to build my character how I wanted to. If I wanted to stick to one school of magic, I could. If I wanted to stick to one type of Destruction spells, I could. In my current Skyrim playthrough, I also have used exactly two spells that weren't Dragon shouts, and both were from scrolls, because I chose to play as a full on warrior.

And you know what? Everything is effective. Sure, some playstyles are easier than others (see the stealth archer in Skyrim). But playing the "non-optimal" setup or the "non-min-maxer" way is still perfectly viable.

Now if you're playing a single player game, or if you're playing ESO as a single-player game sticking to overland or even random dungeons where you treat the other players as NPCs, then you really can do whatever you want. You still have all that freedom to do amazingly well with whatever you want to.

It's when you get into the realm of competitive playstyles that that freedom is an illusion. PvP and endgame PvE. At that point, if you're not min-maxing similarly to how others are, then you're going to be left behind... and left off the teams. How do you address that? Well, good players can take off-meta builds and still do really well with them - I've seen endgame trial members take 'forbidden' setups through everything because they can, and still do better. I've seen DKs and Templars and Necros outparse Arcanists because those players know their character inside and out. It means they're pushing their build to the absolute limit, but they've proven that they can still keep up, and it's usually because they have a seething hatred toward the meta for some reason. And a lot of that works because there is some semblance of balance now. It's not perfect, but they can make up for the lack of a meta build by offerring buffs or other things like execute power that the meta doesn't have.

So what happens when the game ends up nerfing their setup into the ground, or forcing everyone into a narrower meta that they're consciously trying to avoid because either they hate that playstyle or they really are that concerned about their character lore? Are they going to suck it up and play something they don't find fun? Or are they going to have to play at a level far beneath them since the high-level groups won't take them (and the mid-level hasn't existed since U35) so they're bored in low-level groups?

Here's a question for everyone who is frustrated with all of the "doomers": Would your life really be different if this had been balanced before it released? It doesn't need to be perfect, but a system where there isn't an absurd power delts like this is offerring. Then you'd still get everything and the people concerned about balance wouldn't be frustrated about it.
That's why people on the other side are frustrated with the "everything is fine!" brigade, since if only they had dome some balancing (and listened to the issues raised on PTS!) that you could have your cake and eat it too. It'd be a system that everyone would be able to enjoy instead of just some of the players.

disky · May 29

cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »

disky wrote: »

Pixiepumpkin wrote: »

disky wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

OldStygian wrote: »

Classes should only exist in so far as they are predefined skill line selections.

We should be able to freely choose 3 skill lines on our toons when we create them.
.

since theyve offered no balance system in relation to the original classes this would seem to be their goal. Get rid of classes altogether at some point and just let players make their own. Certainly not a bad thing. More elder scrolls, less generic mmo.

Call me casual, but as someone who has played TES games for 25 years, I've always built my own class based on how I wanted to play and so this change feels very right to me. I spend a lot of time on builds that feels both on-theme and moderately effective, but I'm not here to min-max. That being said, to those crying doom over the "end of class identity" or the dissolution of whatever they believed to be a state of balance, I think this should be taken as an opportunity to re-*** things in a positive way. It may take a little time, but ZOS intends to ensure that everything will feel good.

There's a lot of valid criticism going around but ever since the beta I was annoyed by the restrictions that classes placed on a player and I'm very glad to see them fall away somewhat.

Edit: The censored word I used above is a normal barkeeping term, and also commonly used to describe a scenario in which something is shaken up. It's fine.

1. This is a multiplayer game, not a single player. This is why classes were created AND NECESSARY for balance.
2. It's disrespectful and dishonest to dismiss people concerned about class identity and balance who have not only shown severe concern over the implementation of subclassing, but tested it on the PTS and proven the community correct. Sublassing absolutely decimates balance in the game.

If you have studied people in raids/trials for the past 20 years or so, then you soon realize that weak DPS often get the boot. It is expected by most raid leaders and the community at large to be able to pull your weight in a raid.

Theorycrafters will find the optiimal build (not much different than now) and expect players to run this build if they intend on being brought along to a trial/raid.

The difference between now and post subclassing ESO is multifaceted.
• On live, classes can be balanced to ensure every player has the opportunity to accel based on what they play. After subclassing, this goes out the window meaning if a player intends to play a pure sorc...LOL good luck finding a group that will carry you.
• Class identity is gone, destroyed, obliterated, non-existent. There is no way to tell what another player is playing after subclassing. This is imporant in PVP where its necessary to understand how the enemy class is played. After subclassing, its a free for all.
• Once the "meta" is discovered (already has been), people are going to be expected to run this to run raids and due to the power differential being huge between a tuned subclass and a "normal" pure class build, you now have even LESS chance of being brought along.

The biggest turn off for me regarding ESO are two things.
1. ZOS moderation
2. Players harassing and abusing other players who do not "pull their weight" in vets, even when the player who is doing less DPS exceeds the threshold necessary to run the vet. Due to the 4 person party, its pretty obvious which DPS is not doing as good when you are the DPS doing 80% of the damage. The issue is people look at % not actual values of damage being done in conjunction with what is neccesary to do the content.

This issue, just got multipled by a massive factor with subclassing. People are already soloing vet march of sacrifices with it, something many folks can barely do right now with 4 people in game even if they understand the mechanics.

Subclassing and the multitude of build options are an illusion because folks who play with other people, especially strangers, are going to be expected to run a strong build.

There is literally more build diversity right now in game than there will be post subclassing, and its because the lack of being able to balance subclassing will result in people playing 1 build, vs a handfull on live.

People have always been expected to run a strong build in every group PvE scenario. Things are different now in a couple of ways:

- It will take a little while for balance to be sorted out due to this very significant change to the game.
- It may take somewhat longer to get to the build that suits your ideal group PvE setup.

That being said, I do recall players complaining about Arcanist outdoing basically every other class in PvE for a while before this was announced, and there were no doubt similar complaints prior to the existence of Arcanist for other issues. That will never stop. ZOS will never be able to create a perfectly balanced game, and they can't build a completely static game that never changes because it would become boring and people would stop playing. So the only choice is to do something new and interesting and hope people like it, and smooth things over with those who don't over time as the new system reaches a greater degree of balance.

I think one thing to consider is that this is such a big change that there will be a lot of new ideas coming to buildcraft for PvE, and we aren't going to figure out what's best right away. That sounds really fun and interesting to me. It's like New Game+ for ESO. Obviously there are players who like things as they were, but as previously stated, I just don't think an MMO can or should remain the same as the years go by. It's not good for the players and it's not good for the studio.

Change is an inherent part of the MMO experience. The game is supposed to evolve and improve, and I get that some people don't like what they're seeing now with subclassing and some of the critical feedback is certainly valid, but it's not as if it's going to stay that way forever. That feedback should be listened to and acted upon, but this feature, to me, feels like it's a step closer to the build freedom that TES games have always provided, and I never expected to see anything like it in ESO. I know we disagree but my interest isn't diminished just because it may make things a little more challenging to manage at release.

Edit: I should say this because I didn't really state it clearly - I disagree that classes are necessary for balance and I disagree that class identity should make a difference. The argument you're making is based on test server findings and speculation. None of what you've experienced is set in stone and the entire purpose of a PTS is to get feedback and make changes in the first place. It is good to speak up when you see a problem but I'm just kind of tired of people dooming about any change they deem somewhat significant, especially when they haven't even really experienced it.

the issue is that ZoS has a track record of ignoring PTS feedback and going live with things anyway, this is how they act like 95% of the time actually

the reason you see so many doomers and people preaching the end is bcs from our own lived exp we naturally assume that ZoS will launch the update in a broken state and then never fix the issues, just as the have a million times in the past.

the trust between the devs and the players is mostly gone due to their silence and actions

I've heard that many times. Maybe it's because I'm a former Star Citizen fan that I just can't find the motivation to call doom on this game when there are projects which have had much, much worse project management and implementation. I see ZOS actually trying. I think there are many things that ZOS can do to improve the game, but when it comes to endgame PvE I am unbothered for a couple of reasons:

1. It's not my primary area of interest in the game
2. ZOS will HAVE to put a lot of effort into this feature because it's simply too big and important to screw up

I guarantee at least some of the people at ZOS remember the SWG NGE debacle or other similar failures and they don't want that for their game. As much as some players might be dissatisfied with certain things, like the Arcanist meta, if nothing changes then that continues to be a problem. So I'll take a significant and cool feature that comes a little scuffed over a static, also bad situation, especially if it means I get to enjoy a whole new character build dynamic I've been interested in trying since beta. All this feels like to me is an opportunity to try new things and that's exciting.

I don't know how to say this without sounding condescending, but I think it's important to become comfortable with less power. Power is an illusion, the game isn't real. Nerfs are made in the interest of balance, just like everything else the devs do. Endgame buildcraft and balance will be addressed. If they make a mistake then it's fine to let them know but that doesn't mean this whole endeavor is a bad idea. Only fun matters.

licenturion · May 29

disky wrote: »

Nerfs are made in the interest of balance, just like everything else the devs do. Endgame buildcraft and balance will be addressed. If they make a mistake then it's fine to let them know but that doesn't mean this whole endeavor is a bad idea. Only fun matters.

Hear hear!

I agree completely with this. I also don't know why people keep spending so much energy in typing huge essays about this topic. It will go live next week. That is an undisputable fact. Better save all that energy for a few days and then test broken setups and combinations and report the numbers, skills and sets so the devs can balance outliers in the weekly patches. That acknowledgement was basically what this article was about actually.

But the doom and gloom is mostly on the forums by a subset of players. If you look at the reactions on the trailers, Reddit and other social platforms most of the players are super excited. There was a poll and also a video by hacktheminotaur last week and it seems the overwhelmingly majority of the player base of ESO is like tomofhyrule put it.

tomofhyrule wrote:

Now if you're playing a single player game, or if you're playing ESO as a single-player game sticking to overland or even random dungeons where you treat the other players as NPCs, then you really can do whatever you want. You still have all that freedom to do amazingly well with whatever you want to.

So ZOS want a first version out asap so they continue to tinker with it and make it better overtime. And then the same people will probably get upset that their new favorite OP build they just assembled get nerfed one week later.

disky · May 29

tomofhyrule wrote: »

disky wrote: »

That feedback should be listened to and acted upon, but this feature, to me, feels like it's a step closer to the build freedom that TES games have always provided, and I never expected to see anything like it in ESO. I know we disagree but my interest isn't diminished just because it may make things a little more challenging to manage at release.

It's when you get into the realm of competitive playstyles that that freedom is an illusion. PvP and endgame PvE. At that point, if you're not min-maxing similarly to how others are, then you're going to be left behind... and left off the teams. How do you address that? Well, good players can take off-meta builds and still do really well with them - I've seen endgame trial members take 'forbidden' setups through everything because they can, and still do better. I've seen DKs and Templars and Necros outparse Arcanists because those players know their character inside and out. It means they're pushing their build to the absolute limit, but they've proven that they can still keep up, and it's usually because they have a seething hatred toward the meta for some reason. And a lot of that works because there is some semblance of balance now. It's not perfect, but they can make up for the lack of a meta build by offerring buffs or other things like execute power that the meta doesn't have.

So what happens when the game ends up nerfing their setup into the ground, or forcing everyone into a narrower meta that they're consciously trying to avoid because either they hate that playstyle or they really are that concerned about their character lore? Are they going to suck it up and play something they don't find fun? Or are they going to have to play at a level far beneath them since the high-level groups won't take them (and the mid-level hasn't existed since U35) so they're bored in low-level groups?

Here's a question for everyone who is frustrated with all of the "doomers": Would your life really be different if this had been balanced before it released? It doesn't need to be perfect, but a system where there isn't an absurd power delts like this is offerring. Then you'd still get everything and the people concerned about balance wouldn't be frustrated about it.
That's why people on the other side are frustrated with the "everything is fine!" brigade, since if only they had dome some balancing (and listened to the issues raised on PTS!) that you could have your cake and eat it too. It'd be a system that everyone would be able to enjoy instead of just some of the players.

But if the entire build system is being completely redefined by this change, why worry about it? Every single player is going to have to figure out how to adjust to this reality, and if everyone is going through that at the same time then who cares? All this sounds like to me is a party. There's going to be a period of time where nobody really knows what's going on, just like it's the beginning of the game all over again, and that sounds fun to me. And eventually, builds will be figured out and things will return to business as usual. Things will be a little different, but it will be fine. It will just take a little time, and when the dust settles we'll have an interesting new feature.

"So what happens when the game ends up nerfing their setup into the ground, or forcing everyone into a narrower meta that they're consciously trying to avoid because either they hate that playstyle or they really are that concerned about their character lore?"

I doubt that most players who are primarily concerned about effectiveness are as equally concerned about character lore, and they're probably willing to adapt for power, so that doesn't strike me as much of an issue. Frankly I think the more lore-focused players are probably excited for this feature because they now have a way to add abilities into their build which more accurately reflect their character concept. As for those who don't want to change their playstyle, I'm sure there will be diehards who find a way to make whatever they want to do work, just as you mentioned earlier, and anyone who cares about power above all will just do what is most effective. I don't claim to have all the answers and I'm sure there will be people who are unhappy no matter what, because there always are. You can't please everyone, but the game has to change.

Maybe people are really set in their ways when it comes to this stuff, and maybe I don't understand why people find endgame PvE fun, but I just keep coming back to the idea that everyone will be figuring this out all at once and that doesn't sound like a bad thing. And certainly, endgame PvE players will have little to no trouble rebuilding their characters to do whatever they need to do. Builds are just puzzles to me and this is a new puzzle to solve.

Joy_Division · May 30

@ZOS_Kevin Thank you for sharing this official commentary. I wrote a post asking for communication. Here we got it. So, I am grateful for that.

Even if I can't say I was happy about or agreed with what was in the article, it does give me a lot of insight into why ZOS made the changes that they did and what we are likely to see in future updates. I no longer have to ask myself, "Why are they doing this?" Now I know.

As @sans-culottes cogently pointed out, the article is mostly fluff.

sans-culottes wrote: »

Subclassing, as presented here, is not a system rooted in thoughtful design. It is a system built on abstraction. The language of “freedom,” “player fantasy,” and “play your way” is repeated like a mantra, but nowhere in this post is there any serious engagement with the structural consequences this introduces, either mechanically or thematically.

The focus isn't on the nuts and bolts of the system. It's about the feeling of picking up something cool and "Your Hero, Your Way." Which is fine and core to the Elder Scrolls Experience. But absent are the ramifications of "my way" being either uncompetitive or broken in a multi-player game where characters interact and compete with each other.

Also absent are the concerns and feedback that have been on the PTS. Which is really frustrating. Why bother going on the PTS and testing this stuff if ZOS's own official commentary ignores it?

The other takeaway I am getting from the article is that ZOS can't decide if their game is a single-player driven experience or an MMO. This paragraph is revealing:

ZOS wrote:

“We know the Subclassing system will infuse power into the player community. For example, players can drop their tank and support skill lines for more damage-dealing abilities and passives,” notes Day. “However, there is a trade-off—by taking all damage skill lines, you are more reliant on your team for support healing, shielding, and protection. Also, there is no desire to reduce the effectiveness of pure classes and their ability to complete content, and overall, the system should make the content more accessible to all players.”

If I am a DPS is a dungeon or trial, I am dropping my tank and support lines because I was not using them. There is thus no trade-off. I am already utterly reliant on my team. So of course in instanced group consent, pure classes are going to get left in the dust. No amount of fluff is going to matter if your prog guild is wiping against the boss and the logs show you in dead last in DPS. This is how MMOs are.

The paragraph, however, treats ESO as a single-player game. It is correct that if I drop my tank and healing lines, I will run into trouble real fast in competitive content in which I am alone (such as Infinite Archive).

The same situation is true for PvP. I would agree that solo PvPers are going to pay a hefty price is they just grab DPS lines. That's fine. But, oh no. Those pesky 12 person organized groups that are already terrorizing Cyrodiil will not suffer this drawback at all and be even more powerful after the update (which is a very, very depressing prospect and a giant step in the wrong direction).

ESO is a Massively Multiplayer Online game. Wish the article remembered that.

OgrimTitan · May 30

disky wrote: »

Pixiepumpkin wrote: »

disky wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

OldStygian wrote: »

Classes should only exist in so far as they are predefined skill line selections.

We should be able to freely choose 3 skill lines on our toons when we create them.
.

since theyve offered no balance system in relation to the original classes this would seem to be their goal. Get rid of classes altogether at some point and just let players make their own. Certainly not a bad thing. More elder scrolls, less generic mmo.

Call me casual, but as someone who has played TES games for 25 years, I've always built my own class based on how I wanted to play and so this change feels very right to me. I spend a lot of time on builds that feels both on-theme and moderately effective, but I'm not here to min-max. That being said, to those crying doom over the "end of class identity" or the dissolution of whatever they believed to be a state of balance, I think this should be taken as an opportunity to re-*** things in a positive way. It may take a little time, but ZOS intends to ensure that everything will feel good.

There's a lot of valid criticism going around but ever since the beta I was annoyed by the restrictions that classes placed on a player and I'm very glad to see them fall away somewhat.

Edit: The censored word I used above is a normal barkeeping term, and also commonly used to describe a scenario in which something is shaken up. It's fine.

1. This is a multiplayer game, not a single player. This is why classes were created AND NECESSARY for balance.
2. It's disrespectful and dishonest to dismiss people concerned about class identity and balance who have not only shown severe concern over the implementation of subclassing, but tested it on the PTS and proven the community correct. Sublassing absolutely decimates balance in the game.

If you have studied people in raids/trials for the past 20 years or so, then you soon realize that weak DPS often get the boot. It is expected by most raid leaders and the community at large to be able to pull your weight in a raid.

Theorycrafters will find the optiimal build (not much different than now) and expect players to run this build if they intend on being brought along to a trial/raid.

The difference between now and post subclassing ESO is multifaceted.
• On live, classes can be balanced to ensure every player has the opportunity to accel based on what they play. After subclassing, this goes out the window meaning if a player intends to play a pure sorc...LOL good luck finding a group that will carry you.
• Class identity is gone, destroyed, obliterated, non-existent. There is no way to tell what another player is playing after subclassing. This is imporant in PVP where its necessary to understand how the enemy class is played. After subclassing, its a free for all.
• Once the "meta" is discovered (already has been), people are going to be expected to run this to run raids and due to the power differential being huge between a tuned subclass and a "normal" pure class build, you now have even LESS chance of being brought along.

The biggest turn off for me regarding ESO are two things.
1. ZOS moderation
2. Players harassing and abusing other players who do not "pull their weight" in vets, even when the player who is doing less DPS exceeds the threshold necessary to run the vet. Due to the 4 person party, its pretty obvious which DPS is not doing as good when you are the DPS doing 80% of the damage. The issue is people look at % not actual values of damage being done in conjunction with what is neccesary to do the content.

This issue, just got multipled by a massive factor with subclassing. People are already soloing vet march of sacrifices with it, something many folks can barely do right now with 4 people in game even if they understand the mechanics.

Subclassing and the multitude of build options are an illusion because folks who play with other people, especially strangers, are going to be expected to run a strong build.

There is literally more build diversity right now in game than there will be post subclassing, and its because the lack of being able to balance subclassing will result in people playing 1 build, vs a handfull on live.

People have always been expected to run a strong build in every group PvE scenario. Things are different now in a couple of ways:

- It will take a little while for balance to be sorted out due to this very significant change to the game.
- It may take somewhat longer to get to the build that suits your ideal group PvE setup.

That being said, I do recall players complaining about Arcanist outdoing basically every other class in PvE for a while before this was announced, and there were no doubt similar complaints prior to the existence of Arcanist for other issues. That will never stop. ZOS will never be able to create a perfectly balanced game, and they can't build a completely static game that never changes because it would become boring and people would stop playing. So the only choice is to do something new and interesting and hope people like it, and smooth things over with those who don't over time as the new system reaches a greater degree of balance.

I think one thing to consider is that this is such a big change that there will be a lot of new ideas coming to buildcraft for PvE, and we aren't going to figure out what's best right away. That sounds really fun and interesting to me. It's like New Game+ for ESO. Obviously there are players who like things as they were, but as previously stated, I just don't think an MMO can or should remain the same as the years go by. It's not good for the players and it's not good for the studio.

Change is an inherent part of the MMO experience. The game is supposed to evolve and improve, and I get that some people don't like what they're seeing now with subclassing and some of the critical feedback is certainly valid, but it's not as if it's going to stay that way forever. That feedback should be listened to and acted upon, but this feature, to me, feels like it's a step closer to the build freedom that TES games have always provided, and I never expected to see anything like it in ESO. I know we disagree but my interest isn't diminished just because it may make things a little more challenging to manage at release.

Edit: I should say this because I didn't really state it clearly - I disagree that classes are necessary for balance and I disagree that class identity should make a difference. The argument you're making is based on test server findings and speculation. None of what you've experienced is set in stone and the entire purpose of a PTS is to get feedback and make changes in the first place. It is good to speak up when you see a problem but I'm just kind of tired of people dooming about any change they deem somewhat significant, especially when they haven't even really experienced it.

ZOS will never be able to create a perfectly balanced game, and they can't build a completely static game that never changes because it would become boring and people would stop playing.

You're missing the point. 1 thing is to bring change, another is to break existing foundations. There is a reason why different classes have different abilities and bonuses. They were designed as enclosed systems for a balance. All classes have different visuals, aestetics and gameplay. Intermixing parts of them with other classes with no adjustments or limitations made is tastless and gamebreaking. You can get all the best skill lines with no downsides. It's not "change", it looks like a desparate attempt to boost fading popularity.

Edit: I should say this because I didn't really state it clearly - I disagree that classes are necessary for balance and I disagree that class identity should make a difference.

Classes are the only major way to keep players in check with giving them a freedom and a chance to be creative. Restrictions and limitations are what gives people motivation to create, to be unique, not an absolute freedom. Also, in fantasy or sci-fi classes are a huge part of characters identities, serving as jobs or professions.

Also, don't be bare with your words - if you say that classes are not necessary for balance, bring an alternative solution to the table.

The argument you're making is based on test server findings and speculation. None of what you've experienced is set in stone and the entire purpose of a PTS is to get feedback and make changes in the first place.

No, they aren't speculation. We have the numbers, we have the math, we have the real examples. Moreso, we already had PTS cycle almost finished, with 0 feedback about breaking the balance taken to consideration.

CAB_Life · May 30

It really is remarkable how they’re seemingly hand-waving away the fact that players—even casuals—gravitate towards the point of least resistance. Stacking three dps skill lines (or tank or healer focused lines) that offer a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits will absolutely trivialize and break the game and every type of content and there’s no way they don’t understand this reality. We know this, we’ve had weeks of PTS testing that prove this, with established nuclear metas already emerging. The response reads as tone-deaf or apathetic. I won’t presume to know which.

The solution will be broad, crippling nerfs many months down the road after tremendous reputational damage has been incurred and players have run amok with godlike tools destroying content, in-game relationships and the economy. No one will be happy with this result—players or developers—but that’s the only solution ZOS has boxed themselves into. I wish I was wrong, though I don’t think I am in this case.

Elvenheart · May 30

CAB_Life wrote: »

It really is remarkable how they’re seemingly hand-waving away the fact that players—even casuals—gravitate towards the point of least resistance. Stacking three dps skill lines (or tank or healer focused lines) that offer a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits will absolutely trivialize and break the game and every type of content and there’s no way they don’t understand this reality. We know this, we’ve had weeks of PTS testing that prove this, with established nuclear metas already emerging. The response reads as tone-deaf or apathetic. I won’t presume to know which.

The solution will be broad, crippling nerfs many months down the road after tremendous reputational damage has been incurred and players have run amok with godlike tools destroying content, in-game relationships and the economy. No one will be happy with this result—players or developers—but that’s the only solution ZOS has boxed themselves into. I wish I was wrong, though I don’t think I am in this case.

I’m curious, when you ran your own personal tests on the PTS, which 3 DPS skill lines did you stack that offered a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits that absolutely trivialized and broke the game, and what were the specific outrageous numbers that stacking those three skill lines caused?

disky · May 30

OgrimTitan wrote: »

You're missing the point. 1 thing is to bring change, another is to break existing foundations. There is a reason why different classes have different abilities and bonuses. They were designed as enclosed systems for a balance. All classes have different visuals, aestetics and gameplay. Intermixing parts of them with other classes with no adjustments or limitations made is tastless and gamebreaking. You can get all the best skill lines with no downsides. It's not "change", it looks like a desparate attempt to boost fading popularity.

Obviously a lot of other players, including myself, don't think it really matters all that much, because the general sentiment is overall positive about this change. I guess I understand that some people want very clearly-defined character classes but that was never what TES has been in the past and this change is something that brings this game more in line with its predecessors, which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. It's going to allow a level of freedom and choice we didn't have before. That sounds like progress to me, even if it's going to take a bit of work to balance things under this new system.

You're not the first person to call it "tasteless" or use some other similar epithet in this discussion, which sounds very silly to me. It's just a game and the developers are trying to improve it, I don't think we deserve to feel that degree of personal offense here. And it's only game-breaking as long as the devs ignore the balance issues, which they cannot and will not do because they know how big of a change this is. They're going to be working hard on this. If after a while they clearly are ignoring it, I'll eat my words and we can all start moaning about it, like good forum goblins.

OgrimTitan wrote: »

Classes are the only major way to keep players in check with giving them a freedom and a chance to be creative. Restrictions and limitations are what gives people motivation to create, to be unique, not an absolute freedom. Also, in fantasy or sci-fi classes are a huge part of characters identities, serving as jobs or professions.

Also, don't be bare with your words - if you say that classes are not necessary for balance, bring an alternative solution to the table.

The only reason you think this matters so much is because you dislike change, and you (I assume?) really like the system you had. That said, if you've ever complained about balance issues in the past, I would propose that maybe you don't like it as much as you think you do, and you're just one of the many people on this forum who seems to dislike change of just about any kind.

The alternative I have for you is to not get so worked up about this. Repeat to yourself "it's just a game, I should really just relax".

OgrimTitan wrote: »

No, they aren't speculation. We have the numbers, we have the math, we have the real examples. Moreso, we already had PTS cycle almost finished, with 0 feedback about breaking the balance taken to consideration.

Yeah dude, that's what I said. You have test server experience and you seem to believe that things are going to be terrible forever. They aren't. Things will be sorted out over time. It's a big change and ZOS needs working data in order to make sensible adjustments. That's going to take a while. I suggest you play the game live, see what happens, try and have fun, and when something happens that feels bad/wrong (badong) then hurry back to the forums and write a blistering OP for ZOS to marvel at.

LalMirchi · May 30

Fear of the Unknown breeds anxiety, which in turn breeds negativity.

I, for one, like the vigorous shake of the snow globe and am waiting...

ArchMikem · May 30

Im not competitive, or at least i don't like to be, which means I couldn't really care less about combat balance.

Im excited to have more ability variety with my characters. I see it as them gaining new knowledge, expanding their magic etc. I'll have to spend time figuring out new setups, but so be it.

chaz · May 30

I THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY GONNA BE FUN.

Sorry allcaps. But I think there was a dream healer build that I had in mind was perfect.

Not sure yet about dps vs tanking .

But I wonder how the pvp aspect will be and if it will make me not "suck" at it much ;p

CAB_Life · May 30

Elvenheart wrote: »

CAB_Life wrote: »

It really is remarkable how they’re seemingly hand-waving away the fact that players—even casuals—gravitate towards the point of least resistance. Stacking three dps skill lines (or tank or healer focused lines) that offer a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits will absolutely trivialize and break the game and every type of content and there’s no way they don’t understand this reality. We know this, we’ve had weeks of PTS testing that prove this, with established nuclear metas already emerging. The response reads as tone-deaf or apathetic. I won’t presume to know which.

The solution will be broad, crippling nerfs many months down the road after tremendous reputational damage has been incurred and players have run amok with godlike tools destroying content, in-game relationships and the economy. No one will be happy with this result—players or developers—but that’s the only solution ZOS has boxed themselves into. I wish I was wrong, though I don’t think I am in this case.

I’m curious, when you ran your own personal tests on the PTS, which 3 DPS skill lines did you stack that offered a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits that absolutely trivialized and broke the game, and what were the specific outrageous numbers that stacking those three skill lines caused?

This is the most common/ meta selection for U46:

https://youtu.be/eYQMYjaGYBk?si=ow04byBqcBJxhKGm

Everything else is a slight variation on this with a couple one bar builds in there for those that truly want to turn off their brains and still hit 160-170k. You have to understand how high that is compared to where we were say a year ago. Gold Road was about 120 to 130K DPS if I remember correctly. And you also have to understand that this probably isn't even the most broken combination that has been found or will be discovered in the next few months. This level of DPS absolutely trivializes almost any PVE content and makes PVP content a game of who shoots first or who wants to build the 100K HP tank with permablock. Indeed, blocking will be about the only viable means of mitigating this much damage in PVP.

Now I love the variety and the concept of multi-classing, as it is much more canon ESO in terms of skill freedom, but I also acknowledge that in its current state and for at least the next 6 to 12 months, it will be unpleasant or even unplayable for a lot of people. The only fix will be to make everything tankier and have massive hit point pools, or to nerf player power as I stated in my first comment.

Rkindaleft · May 31

CAB_Life wrote: »

Elvenheart wrote: »

CAB_Life wrote: »

It really is remarkable how they’re seemingly hand-waving away the fact that players—even casuals—gravitate towards the point of least resistance. Stacking three dps skill lines (or tank or healer focused lines) that offer a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits will absolutely trivialize and break the game and every type of content and there’s no way they don’t understand this reality. We know this, we’ve had weeks of PTS testing that prove this, with established nuclear metas already emerging. The response reads as tone-deaf or apathetic. I won’t presume to know which.

The solution will be broad, crippling nerfs many months down the road after tremendous reputational damage has been incurred and players have run amok with godlike tools destroying content, in-game relationships and the economy. No one will be happy with this result—players or developers—but that’s the only solution ZOS has boxed themselves into. I wish I was wrong, though I don’t think I am in this case.

I’m curious, when you ran your own personal tests on the PTS, which 3 DPS skill lines did you stack that offered a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits that absolutely trivialized and broke the game, and what were the specific outrageous numbers that stacking those three skill lines caused?

Now I love the variety and the concept of multi-classing, as it is much more canon ESO in terms of skill freedom, but I also acknowledge that in its current state and for at least the next 6 to 12 months, it will be unpleasant or even unplayable for a lot of people. The only fix will be to make everything tankier and have massive hit point pools, or to nerf player power as I stated in my first comment.

And you just know that ZOS's solution to this will be to nerf the skills that are OP with Subclassing, instead of just making skills and passives that are Subclassed weaker, which means the people who don't wish to Subclass or ones that prefer the class-identity oriented playstyle will just have their builds ruined for no reason.

licenturion · May 31

CAB_Life wrote: »

Everything else is a slight variation on this with a couple one bar builds in there for those that truly want to turn off their brains and still hit 160-170k. You have to understand how high that is compared to where we were say a year ago. Gold Road was about 120 to 130K DPS if I remember correctly. And you also have to understand that this probably isn't even the most broken combination that has been found or will be discovered in the next few months. This level of DPS absolutely trivializes almost any PVE content and makes PVP content a game of who shoots first or who wants to build the 100K HP tank with permablock. Indeed, blocking will be about the only viable means of mitigating this much damage in PVP.

Now I love the variety and the concept of multi-classing, as it is much more canon ESO in terms of skill freedom, but I also acknowledge that in its current state and for at least the next 6 to 12 months, it will be unpleasant or even unplayable for a lot of people. The only fix will be to make everything tankier and have massive hit point pools, or to nerf player power as I stated in my first comment.

I leave PvP out of the equation for a moment. But why exactly is this bad from a PvE standpoint. All I see I less gatekeeping and casual players would be able to run more difficult content now. Just like one bar HA builds made the game more accessible for a lot of players. So I consider this a win for those who want to go on a content clearing spree next week to collect stuff they were missing. I am pretty sure that making stuff more accessible is also one of ZOS their goals with making subclassing and scribing free base game updates.

And for those who don't want to, they don't have to. You really don't need 180K DPS for 98 percent of content of the game.

mrreow · May 31

At this point I hope that this is just a painful, temporary step that satisfies no one, before full overhaul of skill lines a la Skyrim or classless mmos.

An interregnum, it will be chaotic and broken. probably a lot of existing population will be turned off but hopefully it will ultimately shape into something better. sink or swim

Although I personally will be there rather after the building is finished because of my inherent distaste for construction sites.

Now to theorycraft a little for fun. Now that the classes are destroyed generally the system will have to be reworked sooner or later. How could it look?

1. Skills - Analogical to weapon skill lines you can use any and all the skills you get to find from overland books and trainers but they are very weak at first. You must use skills to train them to achieve sufficient power to be ready for group content.

2. Passives - champion point copy paste. By using the skills that are part of greater archetype you score points in each constellation that you can spend to modify your build.

DenverRalphy · May 31

So what are the secrets the headline allludes to?

[edit] Honest question. Thought perhaps I missed something.

old_scopie1945 · May 31

CAB_Life wrote: »

It really is remarkable how they’re seemingly hand-waving away the fact that players—even casuals—gravitate towards the point of least resistance. Stacking three dps skill lines (or tank or healer focused lines) that offer a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits will absolutely trivialize and break the game and every type of content and there’s no way they don’t understand this reality. We know this, we’ve had weeks of PTS testing that prove this, with established nuclear metas already emerging. The response reads as tone-deaf or apathetic. I won’t presume to know which.

The solution will be broad, crippling nerfs many months down the road after tremendous reputational damage has been incurred and players have run amok with godlike tools destroying content, in-game relationships and the economy. No one will be happy with this result—players or developers—but that’s the only solution ZOS has boxed themselves into. I wish I was wrong, though I don’t think I am in this case.

I suspect that it is the shadowy money men pulling the strings behind the curtains.

old_scopie1945 · May 31

Rkindaleft wrote: »

CAB_Life wrote: »

Elvenheart wrote: »

CAB_Life wrote: »

It really is remarkable how they’re seemingly hand-waving away the fact that players—even casuals—gravitate towards the point of least resistance. Stacking three dps skill lines (or tank or healer focused lines) that offer a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits will absolutely trivialize and break the game and every type of content and there’s no way they don’t understand this reality. We know this, we’ve had weeks of PTS testing that prove this, with established nuclear metas already emerging. The response reads as tone-deaf or apathetic. I won’t presume to know which.

The solution will be broad, crippling nerfs many months down the road after tremendous reputational damage has been incurred and players have run amok with godlike tools destroying content, in-game relationships and the economy. No one will be happy with this result—players or developers—but that’s the only solution ZOS has boxed themselves into. I wish I was wrong, though I don’t think I am in this case.

I’m curious, when you ran your own personal tests on the PTS, which 3 DPS skill lines did you stack that offered a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits that absolutely trivialized and broke the game, and what were the specific outrageous numbers that stacking those three skill lines caused?

Now I love the variety and the concept of multi-classing, as it is much more canon ESO in terms of skill freedom, but I also acknowledge that in its current state and for at least the next 6 to 12 months, it will be unpleasant or even unplayable for a lot of people. The only fix will be to make everything tankier and have massive hit point pools, or to nerf player power as I stated in my first comment.

And you just know that ZOS's solution to this will be to nerf the skills that are OP with Subclassing, instead of just making skills and passives that are Subclassed weaker, which means the people who don't wish to Subclass or ones that prefer the class-identity oriented playstyle will just have their builds ruined for no reason.

And there, in a nutshell, is the problem.

old_scopie1945 · May 31

licenturion wrote: »

CAB_Life wrote: »

Everything else is a slight variation on this with a couple one bar builds in there for those that truly want to turn off their brains and still hit 160-170k. You have to understand how high that is compared to where we were say a year ago. Gold Road was about 120 to 130K DPS if I remember correctly. And you also have to understand that this probably isn't even the most broken combination that has been found or will be discovered in the next few months. This level of DPS absolutely trivializes almost any PVE content and makes PVP content a game of who shoots first or who wants to build the 100K HP tank with permablock. Indeed, blocking will be about the only viable means of mitigating this much damage in PVP.

Now I love the variety and the concept of multi-classing, as it is much more canon ESO in terms of skill freedom, but I also acknowledge that in its current state and for at least the next 6 to 12 months, it will be unpleasant or even unplayable for a lot of people. The only fix will be to make everything tankier and have massive hit point pools, or to nerf player power as I stated in my first comment.

I leave PvP out of the equation for a moment. But why exactly is this bad from a PvE standpoint. All I see I less gatekeeping and casual players would be able to run more difficult content now. Just like one bar HA builds made the game more accessible for a lot of players. So I consider this a win for those who want to go on a content clearing spree next week to collect stuff they were missing. I am pretty sure that making stuff more accessible is also one of ZOS their goals with making subclassing and scribing free base game updates.

And for those who don't want to, they don't have to. You really don't need 180K DPS for 98 percent of content of the game.

I see more gatekeeping, not less.

tomofhyrule · May 31

licenturion wrote: »

CAB_Life wrote: »

Everything else is a slight variation on this with a couple one bar builds in there for those that truly want to turn off their brains and still hit 160-170k. You have to understand how high that is compared to where we were say a year ago. Gold Road was about 120 to 130K DPS if I remember correctly. And you also have to understand that this probably isn't even the most broken combination that has been found or will be discovered in the next few months. This level of DPS absolutely trivializes almost any PVE content and makes PVP content a game of who shoots first or who wants to build the 100K HP tank with permablock. Indeed, blocking will be about the only viable means of mitigating this much damage in PVP.

Now I love the variety and the concept of multi-classing, as it is much more canon ESO in terms of skill freedom, but I also acknowledge that in its current state and for at least the next 6 to 12 months, it will be unpleasant or even unplayable for a lot of people. The only fix will be to make everything tankier and have massive hit point pools, or to nerf player power as I stated in my first comment.

I leave PvP out of the equation for a moment. But why exactly is this bad from a PvE standpoint. All I see I less gatekeeping and casual players would be able to run more difficult content now. Just like one bar HA builds made the game more accessible for a lot of players. So I consider this a win for those who want to go on a content clearing spree next week to collect stuff they were missing. I am pretty sure that making stuff more accessible is also one of ZOS their goals with making subclassing and scribing free base game updates.

And for those who don't want to, they don't have to. You really don't need 180K DPS for 98 percent of content of the game.

Uhh... PvP is part of the equation, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

But let's look at your PvE argument - you say it's good for such ridiculous power creep? And you're comparing it to how Oakensorc made endgame more approachable?

Remind me: how many threads have we seen lately where the main complaint was "groups are not letting me in because I play Oakensorc and that's not good enough for them!"

A lot of the arguments you're making, particularly the "you really don't need 180K DPS for 98 percent of content of the game" one, are missing one teensy little thing: you're not playing solo or with NPCs. That means that you do have to work with other people and their requirements. Sure, you can clear a lot of content with reasonably low DPS - there's a reason carry services work since some people are good enough to 11-man trial trifectas - but if you're in a group you will be expected to be an asset to the group. If you come in demanding that the group accept you as you are, they are perfectly allowed to not take you and take someone else who will conform to their higher standards.

I tank in high-level content, so my DPS is irrelevant. But I've been in groups that have high DPS and ones that have low DPS. I can confidently say that the higher the DPS, the easier my life is - fewer mechanics to deal with, fewer chances to make a mistake, and the possibility to skip entire phases. If we're getting absurd power creep from this, there's no way in Oblivion that most groups are going to even consider taking people who aren't doing the insane DPS so they can make life go easier.

So sure, you may not need 180K DPS to do the content... but you will need to do that much to find groups.

Also I want to remind everyone that Subclassing will not automatically raise the floor just for logging in. If you want to pick skill lines because you like the way they look or match with your character's personal lore (which includes pureclassing at this point), you're getting nerfs and nothing to show for it. Your DPS will go up if you build your character a certain way: 1) take Herald of the Tome so you can get Fatecarver and Tentacular Dread, 2) take Assassination for the passives and so you can slot Grim Focus for the buffs, 3) drop all of your heals and shields and rely on the healers and tanks for that, 4) use the right potions and sets
Essentially, the way you increase DPS is by min-maxing. But... isn't that the problem that people who choose not to min-max are already excluded from groups? Are we expecting that people who don't care about min-maxing will suddenly start caring about it so they can get into groups?

Subclassing's "balance" (if you want to call it that) is currently doing two things: raising the ceiling to a ridiculous level, and severely increasing the gap between sweaty organized players and casuals. And as such, we're likely to see some meganerfs coming in U47 and U48 once people realize that thins like a 47-second IR shouldn't exactly be possible.

Now, for PvP (which is still a part of this game and can't just be ignored), there's no way to avoid Subclassing. First, you now have no way to know how to counter someone since they can be everything at once, and secondly you will need to play meta because other people will. If you don't play at their level, you will lose. So really, there's not much of a choice there. And the only way to survive double-proc bows is to build even tankier (which has always been the problem), so this will just make the PvP meta a way worse version of what it already is.
Not to mention that one Class line is literally broken on PTS because the new pet/corpse limit makes the Grave Lord skills essentially playable since you can't summon your Blastbones

CAB_Life · May 31

tomofhyrule wrote: »

licenturion wrote: »

CAB_Life wrote: »

Everything else is a slight variation on this with a couple one bar builds in there for those that truly want to turn off their brains and still hit 160-170k. You have to understand how high that is compared to where we were say a year ago. Gold Road was about 120 to 130K DPS if I remember correctly. And you also have to understand that this probably isn't even the most broken combination that has been found or will be discovered in the next few months. This level of DPS absolutely trivializes almost any PVE content and makes PVP content a game of who shoots first or who wants to build the 100K HP tank with permablock. Indeed, blocking will be about the only viable means of mitigating this much damage in PVP.

Now I love the variety and the concept of multi-classing, as it is much more canon ESO in terms of skill freedom, but I also acknowledge that in its current state and for at least the next 6 to 12 months, it will be unpleasant or even unplayable for a lot of people. The only fix will be to make everything tankier and have massive hit point pools, or to nerf player power as I stated in my first comment.

I leave PvP out of the equation for a moment. But why exactly is this bad from a PvE standpoint. All I see I less gatekeeping and casual players would be able to run more difficult content now. Just like one bar HA builds made the game more accessible for a lot of players. So I consider this a win for those who want to go on a content clearing spree next week to collect stuff they were missing. I am pretty sure that making stuff more accessible is also one of ZOS their goals with making subclassing and scribing free base game updates.

And for those who don't want to, they don't have to. You really don't need 180K DPS for 98 percent of content of the game.

Uhh... PvP is part of the equation, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

But let's look at your PvE argument - you say it's good for such ridiculous power creep? And you're comparing it to how Oakensorc made endgame more approachable?

Remind me: how many threads have we seen lately where the main complaint was "groups are not letting me in because I play Oakensorc and that's not good enough for them!"

A lot of the arguments you're making, particularly the "you really don't need 180K DPS for 98 percent of content of the game" one, are missing one teensy little thing: you're not playing solo or with NPCs. That means that you do have to work with other people and their requirements. Sure, you can clear a lot of content with reasonably low DPS - there's a reason carry services work since some people are good enough to 11-man trial trifectas - but if you're in a group you will be expected to be an asset to the group. If you come in demanding that the group accept you as you are, they are perfectly allowed to not take you and take someone else who will conform to their higher standards.

I tank in high-level content, so my DPS is irrelevant. But I've been in groups that have high DPS and ones that have low DPS. I can confidently say that the higher the DPS, the easier my life is - fewer mechanics to deal with, fewer chances to make a mistake, and the possibility to skip entire phases. If we're getting absurd power creep from this, there's no way in Oblivion that most groups are going to even consider taking people who aren't doing the insane DPS so they can make life go easier.

So sure, you may not need 180K DPS to do the content... but you will need to do that much to find groups.

Also I want to remind everyone that Subclassing will not automatically raise the floor just for logging in. If you want to pick skill lines because you like the way they look or match with your character's personal lore (which includes pureclassing at this point), you're getting nerfs and nothing to show for it. Your DPS will go up if you build your character a certain way: 1) take Herald of the Tome so you can get Fatecarver and Tentacular Dread, 2) take Assassination for the passives and so you can slot Grim Focus for the buffs, 3) drop all of your heals and shields and rely on the healers and tanks for that, 4) use the right potions and sets
Essentially, the way you increase DPS is by min-maxing. But... isn't that the problem that people who choose not to min-max are already excluded from groups? Are we expecting that people who don't care about min-maxing will suddenly start caring about it so they can get into groups?

Subclassing's "balance" (if you want to call it that) is currently doing two things: raising the ceiling to a ridiculous level, and severely increasing the gap between sweaty organized players and casuals. And as such, we're likely to see some meganerfs coming in U47 and U48 once people realize that thins like a 47-second IR shouldn't exactly be possible.

Now, for PvP (which is still a part of this game and can't just be ignored), there's no way to avoid Subclassing. First, you now have no way to know how to counter someone since they can be everything at once, and secondly you will need to play meta because other people will. If you don't play at their level, you will lose. So really, there's not much of a choice there. And the only way to survive double-proc bows is to build even tankier (which has always been the problem), so this will just make the PvP meta a way worse version of what it already is.
Not to mention that one Class line is literally broken on PTS because the new pet/corpse limit makes the Grave Lord skills essentially playable since you can't summon your Blastbones

As you've laid out quite clearly, it's important to note that the skill gap, knowledge gap, and skill ceiling will be even higher with this new level of flexibility and min-maxing. So casual players will play even worse, comparatively, even if the floor is 'technically' raised – it won't be 'practically' raised because they don't have the knowledge or competence on how to do so.

ArchMikem · May 31

CAB_Life wrote: »

Elvenheart wrote: »

CAB_Life wrote: »

It really is remarkable how they’re seemingly hand-waving away the fact that players—even casuals—gravitate towards the point of least resistance. Stacking three dps skill lines (or tank or healer focused lines) that offer a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits will absolutely trivialize and break the game and every type of content and there’s no way they don’t understand this reality. We know this, we’ve had weeks of PTS testing that prove this, with established nuclear metas already emerging. The response reads as tone-deaf or apathetic. I won’t presume to know which.

The solution will be broad, crippling nerfs many months down the road after tremendous reputational damage has been incurred and players have run amok with godlike tools destroying content, in-game relationships and the economy. No one will be happy with this result—players or developers—but that’s the only solution ZOS has boxed themselves into. I wish I was wrong, though I don’t think I am in this case.

I’m curious, when you ran your own personal tests on the PTS, which 3 DPS skill lines did you stack that offered a host of incredibly destructive skills and traits that absolutely trivialized and broke the game, and what were the specific outrageous numbers that stacking those three skill lines caused?

This is the most common/ meta selection for U46:

https://youtu.be/eYQMYjaGYBk?si=ow04byBqcBJxhKGm

Everything else is a slight variation on this with a couple one bar builds in there for those that truly want to turn off their brains and still hit 160-170k. You have to understand how high that is compared to where we were say a year ago. Gold Road was about 120 to 130K DPS if I remember correctly.

I remember the good ol' days when 90k was high, and 25k was the average.

gc0018 · May 31

I think somebody mentioned there will be a massive balance change. Will it come with U46 or after? I haven't seen any updated about it yet.

AdiraLynn · May 31

I'm concerned very much about subclassing. Because some nerds with too much time on their hands determined that sorc would no longer be needed in any core group once the update launches, I am out of the core group I'm in because I play only a sorc. I understand the premise behind subclassing, but if this results in groups not wanting a sorc around that will be an end game for me. Do you guys actually play the game? Did you think of the ramifications to certain classes being kicked to the corner?

cuddles_with_wroble · June 1

CAB_Life wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

licenturion wrote: »

CAB_Life wrote: »

Everything else is a slight variation on this with a couple one bar builds in there for those that truly want to turn off their brains and still hit 160-170k. You have to understand how high that is compared to where we were say a year ago. Gold Road was about 120 to 130K DPS if I remember correctly. And you also have to understand that this probably isn't even the most broken combination that has been found or will be discovered in the next few months. This level of DPS absolutely trivializes almost any PVE content and makes PVP content a game of who shoots first or who wants to build the 100K HP tank with permablock. Indeed, blocking will be about the only viable means of mitigating this much damage in PVP.

Now I love the variety and the concept of multi-classing, as it is much more canon ESO in terms of skill freedom, but I also acknowledge that in its current state and for at least the next 6 to 12 months, it will be unpleasant or even unplayable for a lot of people. The only fix will be to make everything tankier and have massive hit point pools, or to nerf player power as I stated in my first comment.

I leave PvP out of the equation for a moment. But why exactly is this bad from a PvE standpoint. All I see I less gatekeeping and casual players would be able to run more difficult content now. Just like one bar HA builds made the game more accessible for a lot of players. So I consider this a win for those who want to go on a content clearing spree next week to collect stuff they were missing. I am pretty sure that making stuff more accessible is also one of ZOS their goals with making subclassing and scribing free base game updates.

And for those who don't want to, they don't have to. You really don't need 180K DPS for 98 percent of content of the game.

Uhh... PvP is part of the equation, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

But let's look at your PvE argument - you say it's good for such ridiculous power creep? And you're comparing it to how Oakensorc made endgame more approachable?

Remind me: how many threads have we seen lately where the main complaint was "groups are not letting me in because I play Oakensorc and that's not good enough for them!"

A lot of the arguments you're making, particularly the "you really don't need 180K DPS for 98 percent of content of the game" one, are missing one teensy little thing: you're not playing solo or with NPCs. That means that you do have to work with other people and their requirements. Sure, you can clear a lot of content with reasonably low DPS - there's a reason carry services work since some people are good enough to 11-man trial trifectas - but if you're in a group you will be expected to be an asset to the group. If you come in demanding that the group accept you as you are, they are perfectly allowed to not take you and take someone else who will conform to their higher standards.

I tank in high-level content, so my DPS is irrelevant. But I've been in groups that have high DPS and ones that have low DPS. I can confidently say that the higher the DPS, the easier my life is - fewer mechanics to deal with, fewer chances to make a mistake, and the possibility to skip entire phases. If we're getting absurd power creep from this, there's no way in Oblivion that most groups are going to even consider taking people who aren't doing the insane DPS so they can make life go easier.

So sure, you may not need 180K DPS to do the content... but you will need to do that much to find groups.

Also I want to remind everyone that Subclassing will not automatically raise the floor just for logging in. If you want to pick skill lines because you like the way they look or match with your character's personal lore (which includes pureclassing at this point), you're getting nerfs and nothing to show for it. Your DPS will go up if you build your character a certain way: 1) take Herald of the Tome so you can get Fatecarver and Tentacular Dread, 2) take Assassination for the passives and so you can slot Grim Focus for the buffs, 3) drop all of your heals and shields and rely on the healers and tanks for that, 4) use the right potions and sets
Essentially, the way you increase DPS is by min-maxing. But... isn't that the problem that people who choose not to min-max are already excluded from groups? Are we expecting that people who don't care about min-maxing will suddenly start caring about it so they can get into groups?

Subclassing's "balance" (if you want to call it that) is currently doing two things: raising the ceiling to a ridiculous level, and severely increasing the gap between sweaty organized players and casuals. And as such, we're likely to see some meganerfs coming in U47 and U48 once people realize that thins like a 47-second IR shouldn't exactly be possible.

Now, for PvP (which is still a part of this game and can't just be ignored), there's no way to avoid Subclassing. First, you now have no way to know how to counter someone since they can be everything at once, and secondly you will need to play meta because other people will. If you don't play at their level, you will lose. So really, there's not much of a choice there. And the only way to survive double-proc bows is to build even tankier (which has always been the problem), so this will just make the PvP meta a way worse version of what it already is.
Not to mention that one Class line is literally broken on PTS because the new pet/corpse limit makes the Grave Lord skills essentially playable since you can't summon your Blastbones

As you've laid out quite clearly, it's important to note that the skill gap, knowledge gap, and skill ceiling will be even higher with this new level of flexibility and min-maxing. So casual players will play even worse, comparatively, even if the floor is 'technically' raised – it won't be 'practically' raised because they don't have the knowledge or competence on how to do so.

The knowledge gap is unfathomably huge at this point and watching the developer vs player bgs made that extremely clear.

The game should do a better job at teaching people how the game is actually played, watching him die to combos and then not even understand what killed him was wild

Hotdog_23 · June 1

React wrote: »

What an out of touch newspost.

People have been pointing out issues with subclassing and expressing their concerns this entire PTS cycle, which have largely been ignored. One of the foremost concerns I've seen is that pure classes are essentially dead for any type of real PVP or PVM encounter once this system releases, because there are almost no scenarios where a pure class is as strong as one utilizing subclassing. Yet according to this article, "there is no desire to reduce the effectiveness of pure classes". What about effectiveness by comparison? This comment completely glosses over the reality of the system.

Furthermore, the team says "Of course, with a change of this magnitude, there are balance concerns, but the team is prepared for what may come.". You haven't even acknowledged many of the balance concerns during the testing cycle for the patch! How can you possibly suggest that you're prepared to address these issues as they arise when you have already demonstrated that you have no intentions of addressing those that have already been brought up during the PTS?

Are you planning to have a more frequent patch cadence to accommodate balance changes in the near future? Or are we going to be waiting the typical 3+ months before you adjust a single thing, as has historically been the case with ESO?

While I agree with you and share your same feelings and concerns. I believe they are waiting and wanting to have real data about the shift before they react and change stuff. Sure, some things are busty and broken. Considering how they have balanced skills in the past, it makes me glad they are waiting and being little cautions in changing too much considering this is such a major shift in the game combat core.

I remember we used to give them hell about all the balance changes at once too. Especially with the release of a new chapter/season. So again, me for one, I am glad they are not going too heavy-footed with more changes considering the mega shift already taking place with subclassing alone.

At present, my main concern is that it is going to weaken pure class builds for the min-maxers and will push some people into thinking or looking down on pure class builds the same way we see such hate towards one bar builds in general. Right now, the only fix for this I can see is a unique buff for pure class builds of say 10% buff to all skills if using a pure class build.

Stay safe

Pixiepumpkin · June 1

Subclassing is the embodiment of "Just because you can, does not mean you should."

sans-culottes · June 1

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

This is the official discussion thread for, "ESO’s Developers Share Subclassing System Secrets"

"Customize your knowledge of the new Subclassing system with this developer deep dive."

@ZOS_Kevin, Carrie Day’s “deep dive” comment about subclassing reveals a glaring disconnect between developer intent and actual system outcomes.

“We have no desire to reduce the effectiveness of pure classes,” she says. But desire is not the issue. Desire is irrelevant. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The problem is not what the team wants to happen. The problem is what is already happening—and Necromancer is Exhibit A.

The new subclassing system doesn’t just raise the performance ceiling. It rewires the combat environment. Already, on the PTS, Necromancer’s core skill, Blastbones, has been functionally crippled. The new five-corpse limit, with a five-second expiration, undermines the class’s entire combat rhythm. Worse, Blastbones is frequently failing to fire altogether under the revised system. This is not a “trade-off” scenario. It is a direct, class-breaking regression. And despite repeated, detailed reports from players like @CameraBeardThePirate, the issue has remained unacknowledged for weeks. direct replies.

The claim that “pure classes remain effective” is not true in practice. Necromancer is a pure class. Blastbones is foundational to the way the class functions. Its unreliability under the new system is not just a hypothetical edge case. It is a systemic failure happening in real time.

Subclassing, by design, creates optimization pressure. That pressure will shift expectations in PUGs, trials, and even casual groups. Players who opt out will not be opting out of a “sidegrade.” They will be opting into underperformance, ridicule, or exclusion. We have seen this pattern before with light attack weaving, hybridization, and mythics. The results are always the same.

So when the devs say “you can still play the way you want,” it rings hollow. Yes, you can—but at a cost. What players are asking is why that cost keeps increasing for those who actually care about class identity and reliability. Necromancer’s current state shows just how far off course we already are.

If this is what “accessibility” looks like, then we need a serious reevaluation of what is being measured and who is being heard.