Gatekeeping and the Beam Meta

Asdara · September 22

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

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

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

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

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

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

Orbital78 · September 22

Dude is projecting his lack of skill. Heavy attacks are okay for standard content, in hardmodes where higher dps is needed they are lacking for newer content. The biggest issue with heavy attacks is that they nerfed their passives so hard years ago. Their cleave is dog water now and the combat team doesn't seem to play the playstyle at all in higher content as they keep releasing sets that don't buff the base heavy attack dmg. There is a reason everyone uses Sergeants mail still, if they haven't given up on the game yet.

Asdara · September 22

Orbital78 wrote: »

Dude is projecting his lack of skill. Heavy attacks are okay for standard content, in hardmodes where higher dps is needed they are lacking for newer content. The biggest issue with heavy attacks is that they nerfed their passives so hard years ago. Their cleave is dog water now and the combat team doesn't seem to play the playstyle at all in higher content as they keep releasing sets that don't buff the base heavy attack dmg. There is a reason everyone uses Sergeants mail still, if they haven't given up on the game yet.

Yeah, projecting hard but the funny part is your post proves my point. The issue isn’t that HA players can’t clear content; it’s that ZOS designs in a way that forces everyone into the same beam/meta funnel. Heavy attacks aren’t bad in standard content, but weak cleave, gutted passives, and new sets that don’t support HA make experimenting a liability. That’s what creates stigma and gatekeeping ,play differently, and you get insulted, excluded, and blamed for design shortcomings that aren’t even your fault.

Orbital78 · September 22

Oh I know, I am a heavy attack enjoyer. It used to be my favorite way to aoe farm, but now everything dies staggered. I suppose I could use a set like macabre, but that doesn't fix the lack of burst burn. The new dungeon DLC's hardmodes weren't very doable if it weren't for the team being very solid. I did end up using my Arc to get Black Gems HM, though we were really close on my heavy sorc.

None of my guilds will straight up gate keep me though, they let me run whatever build I want for the most part. My heavy attacks are gonna be the bottom of the logs usually unless we have some new players too. I've done all vet trials with them so far, some older hardmodes. vRG HM and newer just isn't viable for heavy attacks though.

Soarora · September 22

Some people are just..... people. Last insult that I got to my face was someone saying I'm a bad tank because I didn't... keep taunt on the last boss of Arx Cornium? Yknow... the boss that turns around and cones someone regardless of taunt? Last insult I got that was behind my back was for not taunting the orbs in Scalecaller Peak's gargoyle boss-- man completely blew off that I have any trifectas (despite me wearing the SCP tri title) because I didn't do one thing that I've never done and will not start doing (if damage is high enough for orbs to be ignored, taunting them will be a waste of gcds and if damage is low enough for the orbs to not be ignored, taunting them would kill me because I can't move around as fast as a DPS and keep the boss in place...).

ANYWAYS, as a fellow HA hater, insulting people and quitting is never, ever, the right thing to do and most people who take that action aren't very good and are just full of themselves.

It is frustrating that ZOS has taken the stance that more variety is good and everything's possible except they won't actually buff underperforming options to make it feel possible. Sure, it's possible to do vMoL HM with builds from 2018. What is not possible is finding 11 other people, 2 of which are tanks, 2 of which are healers, and at least one to lead... who will let you do vMoL HM with builds from 2018. I straight-up quit trials because I'm over trudging through groups where I feel like a terrible player for not playing exactly how other people want me to (if I had a nickel for every time I was belittled for something small that genuinely made 0 difference to the run...) and I'm not going to fight the uphill battle of not subclassing.

Orbital78 · September 22

Soarora wrote: »

It is frustrating that ZOS has taken the stance that more variety is good and everything's possible except they won't actually buff underperforming options to make it feel possible. Sure, it's possible to do vMoL HM with builds from 2018. What is not possible is finding 11 other people, 2 of which are tanks, 2 of which are healers, and at least one to lead... who will let you do vMoL HM with builds from 2018. I straight-up quit trials because I'm over trudging through groups where I feel like a terrible player for not playing exactly how other people want me to (if I had a nickel for every time I was belittled for something small that genuinely made 0 difference to the run...) and I'm not going to fight the uphill battle of not subclassing.

No one wants to do vMoL HM without a 3 pad burn, myself included. That basically required me to run my arcanist. I basically only do trials when I need a lead or there is a endeavor or event going on now though. Basic veteran trials are boring at this point, and the gap to hardmode is night and day, some fights are totally different than vet. But that is kind of the way normals are compared to vet, you don't even have to do mechs in normals usually or actually need a tank sometimes.

Soarora · September 23

Orbital78 wrote: »

Soarora wrote: »

It is frustrating that ZOS has taken the stance that more variety is good and everything's possible except they won't actually buff underperforming options to make it feel possible. Sure, it's possible to do vMoL HM with builds from 2018. What is not possible is finding 11 other people, 2 of which are tanks, 2 of which are healers, and at least one to lead... who will let you do vMoL HM with builds from 2018. I straight-up quit trials because I'm over trudging through groups where I feel like a terrible player for not playing exactly how other people want me to (if I had a nickel for every time I was belittled for something small that genuinely made 0 difference to the run...) and I'm not going to fight the uphill battle of not subclassing.

No one wants to do vMoL HM without a 3 pad burn, myself included. That basically required me to run my arcanist. I basically only do trials when I need a lead or there is a endeavor or event going on now though. Basic veteran trials are boring at this point, and the gap to hardmode is night and day, some fights are totally different than vet. But that is kind of the way normals are compared to vet, you don't even have to do mechs in normals usually or actually need a tank sometimes.

Yeah, see, that's the problem. People (ZOS included) can say there's 100000s of ways to play all they want but viable ways to play and actually get a group to do the content only includes a handful of sets, weapons, and skill lines and viable ways to play that won't get you made fun of is an even smaller pool to pick from. Unpopular opinion, I love lunar phase. But I also wouldn't join a group that has such low damage that lunar phase is accidentally going to happen because any prog will be so! much! worse! with low DPS and players that know what they're doing don't have low dps... so there would be prog.

SeaGtGruff · September 23

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

Asdara · September 23

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

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

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

PurpleScroll · September 23

Oh I've had some really stupid toxicity from people in dungeons before. I enjoy playing a nightblade tank, it was a random normal daily and I got FG1 (urgh). No one died, we got through it quickly, but one DD at the end started insulting me because 'nightblades can't be tanks', thankfully the healer backed me up and said 'no one died? what's your problem?'.

kargen27 · September 23

Asdara wrote: »

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

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

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

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

tomofhyrule · September 23

kargen27 wrote: »

Asdara wrote: »

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

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

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

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

Of course there will always be a meta.

But the thing you don't see in other games is the second best build being less than 75% of the best build. And that's a lot of what we're seeing here.

If all builds were within like 10% of each other, then there would be a lot more "play the way you want" allowed. Sure you'd have the thinks-they're-better-than-they-are idiots demanding that there was only one strategy, but the issue right now is that they're right. There is only one strategy right now, especially as you get into things above Godslayer.

Better balance would still allow people to do what they want, but then more different strategies would be acceptable in the highest levels.

Asdara · September 23

kargen27 wrote: »

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

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

Asdara · September 23

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Of course there will always be a meta.

But the thing you don't see in other games is the second best build being less than 75% of the best build. And that's a lot of what we're seeing here.

If all builds were within like 10% of each other, then there would be a lot more "play the way you want" allowed. Sure you'd have the thinks-they're-better-than-they-are idiots demanding that there was only one strategy, but the issue right now is that they're right. There is only one strategy right now, especially as you get into things above Godslayer.

Better balance would still allow people to do what they want, but then more different strategies would be acceptable in the highest levels.

Absolutely, remember there was graph that showed each specs compared to others. i can't find it anymore.
Just got that one from reddit :

moderatelyfatman · September 23

Asdara wrote: »

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

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

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

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

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

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

I wonder how much of this is due to the general decline in the skill level of the playerbase?
There seems to be a much higher number of players these days who are doing hard modes in dlc dungeons with only 300 CP on arcanists.

Asdara · September 23

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

I wonder how much of this is due to the general decline in the skill level of the playerbase?
There seems to be a much higher number of players these days who are doing hard modes in dlc dungeons with only 300 CP on arcanists.

Yeah, i think theres a plague of "i can parse high on dummy, so i must be good" going on.

Treeshka · September 23

Asdara wrote: »

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

I wonder how much of this is due to the general decline in the skill level of the playerbase?
There seems to be a much higher number of players these days who are doing hard modes in dlc dungeons with only 300 CP on arcanists.

Yeah, i think theres a plague of "i can parse high on dummy, so i must be good" going on.

I am seeing a lot of high value parses from new players. But their build is like pure single target. I believe it is a bit misleading for player understanding of damage because most of the latest raids relies on area damage to clear easily. So this single target builds will not do much. Where some raid setup does less damage then this pure single target in dummy.

Edit: Grammar

zaria · September 23

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

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

This, was an poll in a wow forum about the minimum gear score for an new and hard dungeon.
At least 25% wanted an gear score higher than the gear dropping in it

Who kind of make it pointless outside of leaderboards and stuff but this was just clearing it.

frogthroat · September 23

PurpleScroll wrote: »

Oh I've had some really stupid toxicity from people in dungeons before. I enjoy playing a nightblade tank, it was a random normal daily and I got FG1 (urgh). No one died, we got through it quickly, but one DD at the end started insulting me because 'nightblades can't be tanks', thankfully the healer backed me up and said 'no one died? what's your problem?'.

Random normal daily in FG1 and... someone first of all paid attention that there was an actual tank and then proceeded to complain about the class of said tank?

Meta chasers tend to forget that any class, any race can do any role and pass pretty much all content. Meta helps you to push scores, but nb is a pretty good tank in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing. I have a friend who is a nb main, plays all roles with it and even as a pure class is a great tank.

Tanking is my weakest role, but even I have finished DLC HM content tanking with my high elf templar, pure class.

Speaking of which, we recently helped a couple of players in vDSA. He tanked with his nb and I loaded a lazy HA build for the healer role with my high elf templar. Basic oakensoul, sergeant, storm master. I just added a burst heal, energy orb and templars heal ring and that's enough for vDSA. Oh yeah, and a taunt for the last boss.

I'm not whipping out my meta builds for a base game HM or vDSA. OakenHA is plenty for those. Way less button pressing for content that doesn't require button pressing. In fact, did pledges yesterday, first with my templar, then with my meta arca dd. With the templar I switched to an actual healer on Dread Cellar HM, but the base games went pretty much at the same speed, although my dps was waaaaay higher with the meta arca. Everything melts that fast that does it really matter if you finish tempest island in 7 minutes or 8. Forgetting to roll at the last boss will cause more delay than using a HA build.

Unholy_Holywarrior · September 23

the people who play this game as if it were a job are about as bad as the people who whine about them...
seriously, people have quit vet and trials for not killing a mob in .453 seconds... what does it matter? i still killed it...
i would hardly call it 'discrimination' though...
just sigh and move on with your life... its not worth stressing and dwelling over...
when it happens to me i just say "some people's children... i swear..."

Gabriel_H · September 23

tomofhyrule wrote: »

But the thing you don't see in other games is the second best build being less than 75% of the best build. And that's a lot of what we're seeing here.

On paper!

As I have been telling min/maxers in MMOs for over 25 years - the player matters. The "meta" is the build that on paper has the maximum (100%) damage potential. That doesn't mean every player can reach that maximum; some will not because the playstyle will not suit them, they will have a lack of engagement of (basically) working a job rather than having fun. Boredom breeds mistakes.

If the next build down is 75% of damage potential (it's really not that much of a gap) but the player loves the build, the playstyle, the class, the role, then they will be running at 100% of their efficiency on that build, but say theu are only 74% efficicency on the meta build because they can't stand it - which is the better option?!

The OPs point highlights this lack of thinking that exists within the playerbase. ZOS (imo) made the problem worse with introducing sub-classing, it will lead to less build diversity at end game, but a fair chunk of blame lies with the players. AS demonstrated by the OP.

CalamityCat · September 23

There does seem to be a real gatekeeping thing in ESO that I haven't encountered elsewhere. If I see a group listed that sound like they're gatekeeping in a bad and nasty way, I just don't bother with it. I could switch to my arcanist and play the silly games for them, but I feel it's just rewarding the bad attitude.

I certainly didn't intend to do HM vet dungeon trifectas with my HA sorcerer, but she was often invited and has done more than any of my other characters. If I wanted that no death run, I took her. She could support the healer enough to ensure the group survived and stay ranged out of trouble. I don't do HA builds normally, this was literally her first build from level 50 while I was clueless about how the class worked. She didn't have spectacular damage output, but she could survive almost anything and cross-healed. I doubt the build works as well now, but I did have fun with her.

SkaiFaith · September 23

Asdara wrote: »

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'll admit I have not read all the comments to this thread but I just want to say in response to OP: it's funny that people ask for balance changes but when someone asks to buff Heavy Attacks or Oakensoul the same people start screaming; those same people are the ones that will then kick you out when they see you are using HA or Oak - you can't win when your opponent is so confused by itself.
So I'm not sure it's a Zos problem... Some players look like they've come out of Sheogorath's realm.

Grizzbeorn · September 23

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

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

Yep. This is a People problem before anything else.
Run with a decent (as in attitude towards others) pre-made group of people, and these problems don't exist.

zaria · September 23

PurpleScroll wrote: »

Oh I've had some really stupid toxicity from people in dungeons before. I enjoy playing a nightblade tank, it was a random normal daily and I got FG1 (urgh). No one died, we got through it quickly, but one DD at the end started insulting me because 'nightblades can't be tanks', thankfully the healer backed me up and said 'no one died? what's your problem?'.

Well if some complained about the class of the tank in FG1 I say they are idiots.
That is for HM, for normal its way worse, as you can solo normal FG1 as a level 10.
Has not seen anything like this,

Renato90085 · September 23

tomofhyrule wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Asdara wrote: »

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

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

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

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

Of course there will always be a meta.

But the thing you don't see in other games is the second best build being less than 75% of the best build. And that's a lot of what we're seeing here.

If all builds were within like 10% of each other, then there would be a lot more "play the way you want" allowed. Sure you'd have the thinks-they're-better-than-they-are idiots demanding that there was only one strategy, but the issue right now is that they're right. There is only one strategy right now, especially as you get into things above Godslayer.

Better balance would still allow people to do what they want, but then more different strategies would be acceptable in the highest levels.

main reason is
in real combat,meta beam still better anything ,because passive stack they can give up sup set and all stat still full,so no meta build maybe cant have full pen and crit dmg
and high cpm style mean if you did a mistack,you will lost few dps,if mech need you block or roll,you lost dps too,the beam can skip this and save dps

https://esologs.com/reports/apzwMgcZGFWdTAV8?fight=14&type=summary
this is my old sbs twin training log,you can see i have alk and mk/zen sup dd and in aoe combat run azureblight ,the 2th badest class(sorry warden) still can do good dmg
but next patch ,nb got buff,the pen passive be crit passive
in same group/member training ,i lost alk and sax so my dps be last
because i need give up cp and set for make up my lost stat (and i choose run alk for me lol)
https://esologs.com/reports/dMZ4aKfWBFht3xXH?fight=16&type=summary&source=12
and it why trial dummy have 100% sup set/skill work time
if today i still have sup dd and set help me,i still lose,because subclass can stack dmg buff and passive,like dk/nb 35% dps buff combat,it other no meta build and pure class cant did

it a problem,if you know a build can free have all thing,why you should play oaken or other anything? give up many thing for what

heaven13 · September 23

Gabriel_H wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

But the thing you don't see in other games is the second best build being less than 75% of the best build. And that's a lot of what we're seeing here.

On paper!

As I have been telling min/maxers in MMOs for over 25 years - the player matters. The "meta" is the build that on paper has the maximum (100%) damage potential. That doesn't mean every player can reach that maximum; some will not because the playstyle will not suit them, they will have a lack of engagement of (basically) working a job rather than having fun. Boredom breeds mistakes.

If the next build down is 75% of damage potential (it's really not that much of a gap) but the player loves the build, the playstyle, the class, the role, then they will be running at 100% of their efficiency on that build, but say theu are only 74% efficicency on the meta build because they can't stand it - which is the better option?!

The OPs point highlights this lack of thinking that exists within the playerbase. ZOS (imo) made the problem worse with introducing sub-classing, it will lead to less build diversity at end game, but a fair chunk of blame lies with the players. AS demonstrated by the OP.

Let's say that we have player A who is playing meta and is 100% efficient. And then we have player B playing off-meta, is 100% efficient with a build that can only do 75% of the meta. And then let's remember that no one is ever going to run consistently at 100% efficiency, no matter how much they like a build or how good of a player they are. And when the gap is at least 25% (at 100% efficiency) that disparity is likely even more pronounced for the hundreds of other players who are never going to be 100% at any build but are still pretty good and would still like to be an asset to their team.

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

twisttop138 · September 23

Idk man, I haven't experienced this, because I spent time finding the right guilds. The right group of people is important, and I never pug vet. I know that some don't have the inclination to find a guild but it'll up your game experience so much.

As for heavy attacks. Some players are just stupid. My main guild in which I'm an officer, the co GM (husband and wife team) she is a HA sorc. She is an amazing player and has very high DPS, in the high 120s. We never have an issue with her pulling her weight and she has many hard mode clears. So I wouldn't be so quick to kick a HA build out of hand even if the play style isn't for me.

gamergirldk · September 23

HA attacks playstyle could use a small buff. But we know they dont do that.

Blood_again · September 23

Asdara wrote: »

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

frogthroat · September 23

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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