RedJohn_COF wrote: »

I actually had a discussion about that in our guild today and someone asked why not keep the class specific leaderboards but also have one for subclassing. That way you don't take anything away from people who just don't want to subclass (yes there are those people) but still have it accessible for everyone.

This would also be interesting to compare how the differences between "subclassing" and none subclassing is, because it was said that it's rather opt in and not a must have.

So I actually think this is a bad idea, because the leaderboards already have a low population on the less played classes. On PC EU, Warden and Necro only 59 and 55 entries in Maelstrom Arena, with 39 and 28 entries in Vateshran Hollows (DK also only has 42 entries there). And the bottom scores there are fairly low when compared to what is possible.

If you make those pure class only, then your leaderboards are going to shrink even more, which makes it lose a lot of value. A leaderboard between 10 players where half the runs are at 0 vitality is not a particularly exciting leaderboard.

T3vvy wrote: »

If you make those pure class only, then your leaderboards are going to shrink even more, which makes it lose a lot of value.

It highlights there is a problem with the class. That's very valuable.

So after people utilized the data from the leaderboards over and over again to verify their claims on arcanists being overtuned and necromancers rotting in the ditch DPS-wise....

They remove any class indicator from leaderboards? Huh.
That does not look great.

loveeso wrote: »

NoticeMeArkay wrote: »

So after people utilized the data from the leaderboards over and over again to verify their claims on arcanists being overtuned and necromancers rotting in the ditch DPS-wise....

They remove any class indicator from leaderboards? Huh.
That does not look great.

So what's the next change? Taking away our ability to log combat events so that we cannot upload them to esologs and thus people cannot clearly see how skewed DPS between the classes/subclassing is?

NoticeMeArkay wrote: »

So after people utilized the data from the leaderboards over and over again to verify their claims on arcanists being overtuned and necromancers rotting in the ditch DPS-wise....

They remove any class indicator from leaderboards? Huh.
That does not look great.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

T3vvy wrote: »

RedJohn_COF wrote: »

I actually had a discussion about that in our guild today and someone asked why not keep the class specific leaderboards but also have one for subclassing. That way you don't take anything away from people who just don't want to subclass (yes there are those people) but still have it accessible for everyone.

This would also be interesting to compare how the differences between "subclassing" and none subclassing is, because it was said that it's rather opt in and not a must have.

So I actually think this is a bad idea, because the leaderboards already have a low population on the less played classes. On PC EU, Warden and Necro only 59 and 55 entries in Maelstrom Arena, with 39 and 28 entries in Vateshran Hollows (DK also only has 42 entries there). And the bottom scores there are fairly low when compared to what is possible.

If you make those pure class only, then your leaderboards are going to shrink even more, which makes it lose a lot of value. A leaderboard between 10 players where half the runs are at 0 vitality is not a particularly exciting leaderboard.

Hmm... it'd almost be like players who choose to run a pure class are at a severe disadvantage in high-level content...

I wonder if the Combat team would ever be interested in addressing that imbalance...?

Gabriel_H wrote: »

T3vvy wrote: »

If you make those pure class only, then your leaderboards are going to shrink even more, which makes it lose a lot of value.

It highlights there is a problem with the class. That's very valuable.

Responding to all of these because they're similar points, but I dont think the point of the ingame leaderboards should be to be used as a tool to show class balance. That's not what they're intended for, and im pretty sure ZoS will still have access to that information. And I also think this isnt what ZoS was intending with this change.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

T3vvy wrote: »

loveeso wrote: »

NoticeMeArkay wrote: »

So after people utilized the data from the leaderboards over and over again to verify their claims on arcanists being overtuned and necromancers rotting in the ditch DPS-wise....

They remove any class indicator from leaderboards? Huh.
That does not look great.

So what's the next change? Taking away our ability to log combat events so that we cannot upload them to esologs and thus people cannot clearly see how skewed DPS between the classes/subclassing is?

NoticeMeArkay wrote: »

So after people utilized the data from the leaderboards over and over again to verify their claims on arcanists being overtuned and necromancers rotting in the ditch DPS-wise....

They remove any class indicator from leaderboards? Huh.
That does not look great.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

T3vvy wrote: »

RedJohn_COF wrote: »

I actually had a discussion about that in our guild today and someone asked why not keep the class specific leaderboards but also have one for subclassing. That way you don't take anything away from people who just don't want to subclass (yes there are those people) but still have it accessible for everyone.

This would also be interesting to compare how the differences between "subclassing" and none subclassing is, because it was said that it's rather opt in and not a must have.

So I actually think this is a bad idea, because the leaderboards already have a low population on the less played classes. On PC EU, Warden and Necro only 59 and 55 entries in Maelstrom Arena, with 39 and 28 entries in Vateshran Hollows (DK also only has 42 entries there). And the bottom scores there are fairly low when compared to what is possible.

If you make those pure class only, then your leaderboards are going to shrink even more, which makes it lose a lot of value. A leaderboard between 10 players where half the runs are at 0 vitality is not a particularly exciting leaderboard.

Hmm... it'd almost be like players who choose to run a pure class are at a severe disadvantage in high-level content...

I wonder if the Combat team would ever be interested in addressing that imbalance...?

Gabriel_H wrote: »

T3vvy wrote: »

If you make those pure class only, then your leaderboards are going to shrink even more, which makes it lose a lot of value.

It highlights there is a problem with the class. That's very valuable.

Responding to all of these because they're similar points, but I dont think the point of the ingame leaderboards should be to be used as a tool to show class balance. That's not what they're intended for, and im pretty sure ZoS will still have access to that information. And I also think this isnt what ZoS was intending with this change.

Obviously that’s not the goal of this. Class-based leaderboards haven’t made sense since U46 since there’s no comparison between what a pure Nightblade can do versus an Arcbladeplar.

But players are frustrated with the lack of balance. And ZOS tacitly admitting that pure-and Subclasses are not in the same league doesn’t magically make the balance issues go away…

I'm not disagreeing about the lack of balance, or players being frustrated about it, but taking that frustration out by criticising what is overall a good change for the leaderboards is going to discourage ZoS from making further improvements to this and other areas of the game.

SkaiFaith wrote: »

Just wanted to say: if you prevent players from having multiple spots on the leaderboards... What will they play for those many hours for which they won't be rewarded anymore? Sounds like another kick to veterans.

I mean as an endgame player, its not really a concern. I'm already progging multiple trifectas every week, and if the weekly trial doesn't line up with what im progging I dont go out of my way to run it a bunch of times.

For sure it is a problem thats worth discussing, but I dont think its affecting specifically endgame players.

dcrush wrote: »

For me the removal of class-based leaderboards is a quality of life downgrade.

I don’t enjoy solo arenas so I only do them once in a while, and then I check which class has a short leaderboard list and do it on an “unpopular” class to get an extra weapon from the arena that happens to be the weekly.

Guess I’ll be doing some farming until U48 drops and then… never do the arenas again.

But for newer players it will make getting an extra weapon from a weekly solo arena more difficult and it will take more runs to complete their stickerbook.

The fact that some class leaderboards are so short that you can place on them with a bad time and low vitality proves that they're not working as intended.

Not a fan of this change at all. Although many of the boards show the dislike for the classes in general (I am not going to say underpowered) I think it leads to way too much prescribed meta building.

I often am on 2 or 3 leaderboards for IA with a Warden and 2 Necros. It allows for building of skills with outside classes with some rewards. But making it one per account account and way less getting on the boards will DECREASE in my opinion the number of people that do those events because there just wont be any reward.

On PC NA Sorcs, DK, and Archanist base characters tend to have much more robust scores because more people use those styles to start with (being some of the favorite DPS classes for the last 3 years). But the top scores are typically fairly similar most weeks on all of the classes. Having only 100 people period makes it less rewarding for me to even want to try because although I CAN Ink run on my Warden it takes way too much time to do that all the time weekly.

What I would prefer if you think that this is best for subclassing, tell use what lines they have, AND have a 2nd leaderboard for Class purists..............People with less time to play are not likely to have a combination of classes to work with as others and like myself may LIKE running a traditional build either due to time constraints on skyshard hunting or because they dont want to max out all the class lines twice (remember you have to max out the skill on a purist and THEN max it out again on a subclasses character).

Another side affect to this is that people will have less reason to try other characters in content and create harder fustrati9on when the major skill line changes happen (If you try to tell me this wont happen, I have been playing this game for 10 years it ALWAYS happens eventually).

If you REFUSE to listen to us like you USUALLY DO (because its better for the game backside, which I would only agree with if I ACTUALLY SAW A BETTERMENT in performance of the game which I honestly have NOT and the same bugs keep popping back up [yes I am talking about the trader guild breaking change to only 14 day listing time with mail STILL BREAKING]). PLEASE make it more than 100 people leaderboard, at least 500 though really it SHOULD be 100 for each class........