ESO needs a reboot in 2026 with a rollback of Subclassing

ZhuJiuyin · 10:24AM

Subclassing isn't the problem, balancing is.

I'm actually quite surprised that ZOS hasn't yet used class sets and class mastery as a means to balance subclassing, given their significant potential. If using pure classes increased the effectiveness of class sets and class mastery by 50% or granted additional buffs, it would definitely increase the appeal of pure classes. Even without using pure classes, class sets could serve as a way to strengthen a single skill line, instead of being essentially useless as they are now.

Gabriel_H · 10:35AM

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

However, no one ever forces you to do subclassing at all, unless you want to go for score pushing and high end game trials.

Yes, Mrs Lincoln, other than that how was the play?

karthrag_inak · 11:01AM

Yes, please make a pre-U46 server, so all the complainers can have somewhere to play by themselves. All 100 of them (khajiit is feeling generous) - server probably could be a beowulf cluster of a half dozen 486s running Tiny Core with a 14" CRT.

SerafinaWaterstar · 12:20PM

Gabriel_H wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

However, no one ever forces you to do subclassing at all, unless you want to go for score pushing and high end game trials.

Yes, Mrs Lincoln, other than that how was the play?

No need for sarky responses.

As has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread, if you chose to go for score pushing & high end game trials, you will be told by the raid lead what to bring. You can’t just rock up with whatever you like & go for trifectas.

Now they tell you what to bring including the subclasses - what is the difference?

And subclassing is fun for those not pursuing such things. So why get rid of it?

Gabriel_H · 12:38PM

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

Now they tell you what to bring including the subclasses - what is the difference?

From about 6 allowable builds per role to 1 - the opposite of build diversity.

Subclassing needs to allow build diversity at all levels or it needs to go.

SerafinaWaterstar · 3:12PM

Gabriel_H wrote: »

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

Now they tell you what to bring including the subclasses - what is the difference?

From about 6 allowable builds per role to 1 - the opposite of build diversity.

Subclassing needs to allow build diversity at all levels or it needs to go.

From what I recall from guildmates doing harder stuff over the years, that really does not hold true - their raid leads were always very specific about the exact builds required.

So it seems it is the raid leads & not the subclassing per se that is the issue?

Gabriel_H · 3:26PM

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

Gabriel_H wrote: »

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

Now they tell you what to bring including the subclasses - what is the difference?

From about 6 allowable builds per role to 1 - the opposite of build diversity.

Subclassing needs to allow build diversity at all levels or it needs to go.

From what I recall from guildmates doing harder stuff over the years, that really does not hold true - their raid leads were always very specific about the exact builds required.

So it seems it is the raid leads & not the subclassing per se that is the issue?

Min/maxers exist in every MMO. The difference before and after sub-classing was as I said: From about 6 allowable builds per role to 1 - the opposite of build diversity.

The system ZOS introduced allows that. They share the blame as much as RLs. The current DD meta is so far ahead of the next best that not just RLs but DDs themselves feel it detrimental.

tomofhyrule · 3:29PM

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

Gabriel_H wrote: »

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

Now they tell you what to bring including the subclasses - what is the difference?

From about 6 allowable builds per role to 1 - the opposite of build diversity.

Subclassing needs to allow build diversity at all levels or it needs to go.

From what I recall from guildmates doing harder stuff over the years, that really does not hold true - their raid leads were always very specific about the exact builds required.

So it seems it is the raid leads & not the subclassing per se that is the issue?

This argument comes up a lot. But even before, we had a few options - parse DDs, support DDs, a bit more flexibility with a player who was really good with an off-meta class.

But that’s all gone now.

Here’s an example from another thread to show the point:

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Let's consider a hypothetical game with three builds:
Build A: very easy to use (difficulty = 1/5) and has decent power no matter who plays it (power = 3/5)

Build B: a bit more technical (difficulty = 3/5) which is okay normally (power = 2/5), but players who understand the game do better with it (power = 4/5)

Build C: really difficult to master (difficulty = 5/5) and is terrible in the hands of most players (power = 1/5), but lethal in the hands of experts (power = 5/5)

Now which is the one players should use? If you're just going based on power, then they should all use C, right? But that's really hard to play and only a few people can use it effectively; the others will be terrible at it and would be better with B or A.
As such, there's reason that different players would want to bring any of the three.

Now here's how ESO currently looks, using the same template:
Build A: very easy to use (difficulty = 1/5) and is incredibly strong (power = 5/5)

Build B: a bit more technical (difficulty = 3/5) which is okay normally (power = 2/5), but players who understand the game do better with it (power = 3/5)

Build C: really difficult to master (difficulty = 5/5) and is terrible in the hands of most players (power = 1/5), but an expert at the build can push a bit more out of it (power = 4/5)

... so what's the best choice here? Is there any reason that any group would not get all of the players to play build A? Especially if the other builds are harder to use and you do worse with them?

SneaK · 3:46PM

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

Subclassing isn't the problem, balancing is.

I'm actually quite surprised that ZOS hasn't yet used class sets and class mastery as a means to balance subclassing, given their significant potential. If using pure classes increased the effectiveness of class sets and class mastery by 50% or granted additional buffs, it would definitely increase the appeal of pure classes. Even without using pure classes, class sets could serve as a way to strengthen a single skill line, instead of being essentially useless as they are now.

This is actually what I worry most about. The idea is thrown out there a lot, and I’m sure it’s a genuine thought. But, increasing percentages or effectiveness in most cases is not going to solve the problem and likely will still be under matched compared to subclassing. Having access to all strengths in order to eliminate any weaknesses is the crux of the subclassing problem. Buffing pure classes might decrease the gap or comparison, but there are still skill lines that are just soooo much better than others it’ll always be a net loss in some way shape or form if you don’t run them.

On the opposite side of that, adding % or buffX could be a min/maxers dream. But in theory it cuts down on variety.

wolfie1.0. · 3:51PM

licenturion wrote: »

For me it can stay. Its gives fun opportunities

However they should give every class skill line a unique passive that does buffs to a skill line and activates only if you use a skill line from your own class

Thats really the problem. Technically those buffs exist... which is why its un balanced.

BananaBender · 4:20PM

It's insane how confidently people talk about "the endgame and scorepushing" without having a single idea how the groups or raid leads actually operate.

There has always been a meta, and there will always be one, but the difference between the meta and off meta builds was around 5% depending on the fight. That's a number you can overcome by simply playing better.

Here is a run from before subclassing, where a NB could compete clearly with other classes despite being considered one of the worst classes in PvE at the time (U45)

So, how is the situation any different now after subclassing? Simply put, you can get way too much damage from a few select skill lines. Crit damage and penetration are the most important stats as a damage dealer. Those are stats you need to have at the cap at all times otherwise you are going to do significantly less damage. Right now the best build by far is Herald of the Tome, Assassination, Ardent Flame (or other which ever skill line you want, you will be beaming most of the time so the difference isn't massive.) This build has 22% critical damage built into it and most groups are going to calculate their crit damage around this very build. If you bring an off meta build, like a non subclassed DK, into a group which is built around the meta builds, you wont be doing 5% less damage than others, you will be doing around 20-30% less. That's the problem with subclassing, it simply funnels too much power into builds with a few specific skill lines.

And anyone who says to play what you want, not what other people want, this isn't a singleplayer game. Showing up to a prog and intentionally doing less damage and making the whole fight harder for your team is extremely disrespectful and shows that you don't value the time the raid lead or anyone else has put into making that group/run happen. Talk to the raid lead/group before hand if you want to bring out an off meta build.
For casual runs/pugs, who cares.

For people saying that the balance is the problem, not the system, I would ask how would you balance such a poorly thought out system?
On a quick glance the beam seems to be the issue, while it is a problem that the easiest build is by far the most powerful, it isn't the core of the problems. You might think passives are the problem based on the short explanation I just wrote, but it isn't, not fully at least. By removing the passives if you subclass, it would solve a few of the issues. Non subclassed builds would be more competitive and the powercreep wouldn't be as insane as it is now, but there are still blatant problems with the system. One of them being that Arcanist would still have a massive advantage over other classes, because it could drop the other two skill lines for stronger skills and not lose any damage, even if you wouldn't get access to passives when subclassing.
For a skill line based subclassing system to work, all of the skill lines would have to be designed around the same system. Right now many of the base game class skill lines are made to synergize with other skill lines in the same class, which just doesn't work in a skill line based subclassing system.

I would love a proper subclassing feature in ESO, but what ever we have right now is an absolute abomination and is not sustainable in any way. It was clearly released half cooked and zos has made no effort to actually fix it. This feature only works if you don't care about performance at all, but let's be real, any feature works if you don't care about performance.

Morvan · 4:56PM

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

Morvan wrote: »

Subclassing isn't the problem, balancing is.

You guys complain about everyone using beam as if that was any different before subclassing, literally every pug I'd join would be full of arcanists either way, subclassing didn't change much for the average player perspective.

What subclassing did was showing how unbalanced the game is, which was already a problem before the change, rolling it back isn't going to fix anything.

It's both.

Balance is a problem. Beam was already overtuned before subclassing in PvE. In PvP, Spec Bow and Streak were already two of the best skills in the game.

The way in which Subclassing was implemented made these problems worse.

In other games, Multiclassing has some sort of drawback. In DnD for example, you won't be able to reach your strongest "capstone" abilities in a class if you multiclass. This is because mixing and matching classes can easily remove your weaknesses and add tons of extra power.

There's no downside to Subclassing in ESO. No incentive to remain a "pure" class. This is an issue, because it means if you want to compete with the best of the best (score push trials, be the best of the best in PvP), you need to subclass.

For more casual players that might not be an issue, but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be adjusted. There has to be some sort of incentive to keep your class pure, whether that be through added passives that only activate if you have a "pure class", or very minor debuffs/nerfs to subclassed skills or passives (think in the realm of 5% to 10% less effective or more expensive skills if they're subclassed).

Yeah, I know it made things worse, not arguing against that, but I still see it as mostly a balancing problem, because they didn't balance every line with the subclassing system in mind.

If every class line in the game was balanced in a way to decently benefit every role, you'd always be losing something no matter what, but instead you have classes like Arcanist with strict roles per lines, so as a DPS you can dump 2 other lines without losing anything, an exchange that only benefits you and nothing more.

Just look at how the majority of the skills in this game always have a dead morph, the main reason they're not used is because they compete with each other while trying to do the same thing, almost always resulting in a single winner for every skill, if they reworked them to do something different from each other we'd have so much more, imagine if you could use Green Balance for DPS, for example. They have enough room to give you a reason to keep all your 3 original lines no matter what your role is.

This would be the ideal scenario for the system they developed, but sadly far from reality.

Gabriel_H · 5:12PM

BananaBender wrote: »

I would love a proper subclassing feature in ESO, but what ever we have right now is an absolute abomination and is not sustainable in any way. It was clearly released half cooked and zos has made no effort to actually fix it. This feature only works if you don't care about performance at all, but let's be real, any feature works if you don't care about performance.

I call it subclassing as that is how ZOS refer to it, but really it's multi-classing. I'd actually like a proper sub-classing system, i.e. further role specialization within the build.

hoangdz · 6:02PM

I'm only speaking from end game PvP perspective here.

Subclassing on paper sounds amazing, but in practice is a disaster not because it's a bad idea, but because the skill lines are ridiculously imbalanced. Take for example these 3 S+ tier subclass builds:

1) Animal Companion + Assassination + Storm Calling
2) Aedric Spear + Assassination + Storm Calling
3) Assassination + Animal Companion + Restoring Light

Build #1 is ridiculously overpowered for openworld PvP and even in dueling. While pre-subclass builds had some form of weakness, this build practically has none. You have access to Major + Minor Expedition, 6s snare immunity, AoE burst, single target burst, a cleanse, amazing heals, amazing sustain, and amazing team utility. This level of overperformance is unprecedented.

Build #2 is unmatched in its 1v1 pressure. You have multiple burst abilities with 3-4 DoTs layered together, forming an unbeatable dueling build. It has so much damage and healing that it's literally out-parsing even parse builds and surviving off sheer healing power. Not only that, but it can also do very well in openworld PvP.

Build #3 is another overperforming example. While it does not have the same burst potential and mobility as build #1, it makes up for that by being EXTREMELY tanky. You have 2 cleanse skills and a lot more healing + healing passives. This IMO is the best build for group PvP because you have burst, cross healing, and mobility.

If you don't run those builds yourself and fight people who do, you're 99% of the time going to lose unless the players running those builds are significantly worse than you. There is simply too much stat/utility difference between those builds vs everything else that not running them is basically throwing. In fact, you don't even need to go full subclass to benefit, as picking just one of those skill lines will give you a massive advantage over pure class specs or even suboptimal subclass lines (like Green Balance).

I like subclassing, but the reality is that the current version of subclassing is incomplete. Diversity was promised, but what we got was a restricted diversity where only a few skill lines are decent and the rest leaves a lot to be desired.

Estin · 6:50PM

Morvan wrote: »

Subclassing isn't the problem, balancing is.

You guys complain about everyone using beam as if that was any different before subclassing, literally every pug I'd join would be full of arcanists either way, subclassing didn't change much for the average player perspective.

What subclassing did was showing how unbalanced the game is, which was already a problem before the change, rolling it back isn't going to fix anything.

Beam is strong, but Beam is also easy to play. Before subclassing, you could still play DK, Templar, Necro, Sorc, and even Nightblade to the same effectiveness as Arcanist. They were just harder to play, but that didn't matter to people. I prefer magblade and magdk in PvE because the gameplay is a lot more engaging and rewarding. But thanks to subclassing, those classes got weaker to make it fit into the game, and are now so far behind that you can't even compete with the subclass meta. Can you complete content as them still? Yeah, sure. But when you're consistently 40-60% weaker than everyone else who subscribes to the meta rather than 0-10%, it's terrible and shouldn't be in the game.

The same goes for PvP. There was always a meta for PvP. But it didn't matter, you could still compete with the majority of classes. Sorc had streak, frags, and overload, nightblade had invis, incap, and spec bow, dk had corrosive, fossilize, and whip, warden had netch, shalks, and northern storm, templar had ceremony, ritual, and rune focus. Just about every class had something that could make them effective against the others. But thanks to subclassing, everyone has ritual, rune focus, netch, shalks, streak, overload, incap, spec bow, etc. Yes, skill is more important than build, but even with skill, the meta subclass build has made balance terrible between the subclass meta and pure classes.

The problem with subclassing was never giving players access to skills outside their skill line. It was always giving players access to skills outside their skill line with zero drawbacks. And to fix the insane powercreep that it introduced, ZOS put more drawbacks on remaining pure class instead of putting drawbacks on subclassing. It's such a backwards implementation and explicitly forces you to go to the meta to even compete. You can't play how you want since you will always be so far behind the meta instead of trailing it like before. The gameplay from the meta setup is also so shallow that it gets incredibly boring fast. Mechanics don't exist anymore, damage taken doesn't exist anymore. It's just big number for instant win now. Anyone who defends that shouldn't be playing this game because they are actively ruining it.

Estin · 7:16PM

BananaBender wrote: »

It's insane how confidently people talk about "the endgame and scorepushing" without having a single idea how the groups or raid leads actually operate.

There has always been a meta, and there will always be one, but the difference between the meta and off meta builds was around 5% depending on the fight. That's a number you can overcome by simply playing better.

Here is a run from before subclassing, where a NB could compete clearly with other classes despite being considered one of the worst classes in PvE at the time (U45)

So, how is the situation any different now after subclassing? Simply put, you can get way too much damage from a few select skill lines. Crit damage and penetration are the most important stats as a damage dealer. Those are stats you need to have at the cap at all times otherwise you are going to do significantly less damage. Right now the best build by far is Herald of the Tome, Assassination, Ardent Flame (or other which ever skill line you want, you will be beaming most of the time so the difference isn't massive.) This build has 22% critical damage built into it and most groups are going to calculate their crit damage around this very build. If you bring an off meta build, like a non subclassed DK, into a group which is built around the meta builds, you wont be doing 5% less damage than others, you will be doing around 20-30% less. That's the problem with subclassing, it simply funnels too much power into builds with a few specific skill lines.

And anyone who says to play what you want, not what other people want, this isn't a singleplayer game. Showing up to a prog and intentionally doing less damage and making the whole fight harder for your team is extremely disrespectful and shows that you don't value the time the raid lead or anyone else has put into making that group/run happen. Talk to the raid lead/group before hand if you want to bring out an off meta build.
For casual runs/pugs, who cares.

For people saying that the balance is the problem, not the system, I would ask how would you balance such a poorly thought out system?
On a quick glance the beam seems to be the issue, while it is a problem that the easiest build is by far the most powerful, it isn't the core of the problems. You might think passives are the problem based on the short explanation I just wrote, but it isn't, not fully at least. By removing the passives if you subclass, it would solve a few of the issues. Non subclassed builds would be more competitive and the powercreep wouldn't be as insane as it is now, but there are still blatant problems with the system. One of them being that Arcanist would still have a massive advantage over other classes, because it could drop the other two skill lines for stronger skills and not lose any damage, even if you wouldn't get access to passives when subclassing.
For a skill line based subclassing system to work, all of the skill lines would have to be designed around the same system. Right now many of the base game class skill lines are made to synergize with other skill lines in the same class, which just doesn't work in a skill line based subclassing system.

I would love a proper subclassing feature in ESO, but what ever we have right now is an absolute abomination and is not sustainable in any way. It was clearly released half cooked and zos has made no effort to actually fix it. This feature only works if you don't care about performance at all, but let's be real, any feature works if you don't care about performance.

Anyone who mentions score pushing as an excuse to disregard legitimate balance complaints has never once step foot into vet content and has no idea what they're talking about. Like, you can't even complete regular vet HoF in weak builds, and that's nowhere even close to end game. Even something much harder like vet DSR isn't end game. That's still mid game, and good luck trying to beat it on a weak build. The meta really starts to become enforceable with HM progs which is only very early end game, but there's still some flexibility. Trifectas are regular endgame, and meta is wanted, but still not 100% required. It just helps a lot. "Score pushing" is the same as the "very high end game" and is something that barely anyone does and is the only place meta is 100% required. It's ridiculous that players whose only group content achievement is nCR think something like score pushing is a common thing.

SneaK · 7:19PM

One thing I find interesting…

Arcanist was built around hybridization and was apparently never a balanced class.

Subclassing has just amplified the real issue of hybridization. I don’t understand how this isn’t more of a talking point. The homogeneity of stats is the main problem, subclassing just took it 5 steps further into the abyss.