Addressing U50 PTS Combat & Ability Concerns

Prionyx · May 11

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Hate to be the bearer of bad news

Then here's some worse news: they do have the data, they just aren't using it for the things that you want them to use it for, or drawing the same conclusions that you are.

I wouldn't be so sure that they do actually have the information.

There has been a ton of evidence over the years to suggest that their visibility into what happens in-game is not nearly as robust as is commonly imagined.

Yeah, like nerfing NB mastery from laughable 7% crit damage to 5% while everyone were saying how bad it is

Prionyx · May 11

xylena wrote: »

Lord_Hev wrote: »

Yes I would still take the game very seriously as a veteran player

I'll take this even further, the extreme power in the stat sheet makes me take the game less seriously. So many PvP engagements where I don't even need to try to win because I already know that my stat sheet is effectively giving me god mode. Wins feel unearned or even automated. Losses come from being outbuilt on paper, not outplayed in combat, which only reinforces players trying to avoid actually fighting to instead try to cheese the build system.

Prionyx wrote: »

That's a wildest take. Literally 100% games with good balance is balanced around what top players do and that's how things should be

Agree that was a weird take but they still need to balance the floor to something, because casuals and noobs need to be able to jump in and do something other than repeatedly die, especially in the absence of any ladder or rank system. Some players just don't seem to understand why raising the floor above the ceiling is a bad thing (one dimensional cheese spam meta).

I don't get it. Zos could half current DPS and it would still be enough for 100% of content. It would also be way more enjoyable since this way you could actually see mechanics and not just skip 90% of them with damage. ZOS have introduced accessibility class(arcanist), if someone doesn't want to learn to play or have disabilities they can play arcanist with their big toe and still do a lot of damage

Zeeejay · May 11

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello everyone!

Similar to Nightblade, we’ve seen some feedback that the Sorcerer Class Mastery kit feels underpowered and not competitive with other classes. We’d like to better understand why some of you are feeling this way. In PTS Week 1, Sorcerers were actually doing the most damage out of all classes by quite a large margin; we did reduce the strength to account for that and later reverted some of the nerfs. Now, it’s worth noting that there is a bug with Sphere of Influence where it’s only applying its damage shield to one player instead of two, and it also doesn’t currently work with Daedric Refuge (this should be fixed in the next PTS patch).

Hello,

I saw this note in another discord and wanted to help provide my feedback here as a Sorcerer main, hopefully it is helpful.

Sorcerer's Class Mastery kit feels underwhelming compared to other classes for a few reasons, but I think it is because there are only two passives that feel truly complete & core to the class:

1. Calculated Defense - provides a short-lived shield and weapon/spell damage buff to the group.
2. Font of Power - provides a scaling % of weapon/spell damage based on maximum stat.

These both feel like they strike a chord with core Sorcerer identities: shields, weapon/spell damage buff, and maximum resource stacking. They are basically what will universally be run by any group pure-classed Sorcerer DPS.

Here are the other class mastery passives with my thoughts on each:

Implosion/Static Reverberation - scales higher with lower target health, shock damage, both VERY good. However, this is negatively affected by running permanent summons, a core aspect of the Sorcerer class (for now?). It's a tough balance to walk, because ZOS clearly wants to bring non-summon builds to be competitive with summons builds, but it's exceedingly tough to do so. In group content, Sorcerer DPS would not run this unless there is another pure-classed Sorcerer elsewhere in the group providing Calculated Defense. In Solo content, Sorcerer also likely wouldn't run this over Conservation of Energy or Calculated Defense, for better sustain and healing, or quick firing shields and a weapon/spell damage buff. This puts Static Reverberation in a tough spot where there is essentially one scenario where it's run.

Conservation of Energy - essentially is a heal, magicka and stamina restore all in one. Really good passive for solo activity, but you wouldn't run this outside of that content for the same reasons you wouldn't run Static Reverberation. I actually think this is a decent passive with a targeted niche.

Sphere of Influence - just an unfortunately awkward passive. I can see where it's supposed to be a "here, I protect you/myself" with a nice little sustain bonus, but it's just completely lackluster in group content and in solo content. I think if it provided either a named buff or some kind of offensive bonus, but it's going to be really hard to justify a Sorcerer support over a Dragonknight, Warden, or Arcanist with their strong group bonuses, and this applies to both small group and trial content.

Overall, the class mastery passives are pretty strong on paper, but you can see where they fall behind some of the other classes in power. Font of Power looks incredible on paper and is incredible to play with, Static Reverberation is fun to play with, but hard to justify over Calculated Defense due to the group buff. Conservation of Energy has a good purpose it fulfills. Sphere of Influence just pales in comparison to other support class mastery passives.

I think it's also important to recognize that Sorcerer has a history of being excellent on the trial dummy with performance that is comparatively lackluster in content. Even before subclassing when other classes were in the 125-130k range on the trial dummy, Sorcerer was near 150k, but you still didn't see dungeon and trial groups filled to the brim with Sorcerer DPS. I'm personally really hoping that the Sorcerer rework addresses the problem skills in the kit that contribute to this like Power Overload, because it really is tough to say "Sorcerer isn't as good as it looks" when all you see are insane trial dummy parses.

ZhuJiuyin · May 12

Tannus15 wrote: »

stop using dummy parses as the most important metric for PvE balance. It's a really good metric is identifying where something is too weak, but it's a terrible metric for identifying when something is too strong.

This perfectly illustrates 80% of the game's current balance issues: dummy buffs are out of sync with reality and incorrectly exaggerate the power of certain classes/skills.
The most typical example is Sorc's Major Brutality and Sorcery. In actual combat, a sorceress must rely on sources other than class skills to obtain this buff, but with dummy buffs, a sorceress can obtain it for free and replace the skill slot originally intended for it with other powerful damage skills.

The same applies to Font of Power. Because the dummy buff includes a 100% maintained Horn buff, Font of Power doesn't feel weak. However, if the Horn buff is removed, Font of Power might be slightly weaker than other similar classes Mastery.

Vaqual · May 12

Conservation of Energy going live like this will be incredibly cringe. I hope everyone will feel at least a bit dirty for using it.

Lord_Hev · May 12

Prionyx wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

Lord_Hev wrote: »

Yes I would still take the game very seriously as a veteran player

I'll take this even further, the extreme power in the stat sheet makes me take the game less seriously. So many PvP engagements where I don't even need to try to win because I already know that my stat sheet is effectively giving me god mode. Wins feel unearned or even automated. Losses come from being outbuilt on paper, not outplayed in combat, which only reinforces players trying to avoid actually fighting to instead try to cheese the build system.

Prionyx wrote: »

That's a wildest take. Literally 100% games with good balance is balanced around what top players do and that's how things should be

Agree that was a weird take but they still need to balance the floor to something, because casuals and noobs need to be able to jump in and do something other than repeatedly die, especially in the absence of any ladder or rank system. Some players just don't seem to understand why raising the floor above the ceiling is a bad thing (one dimensional cheese spam meta).

I don't get it. Zos could half current DPS and it would still be enough for 100% of content. It would also be way more enjoyable since this way you could actually see mechanics and not just skip 90% of them with damage. ZOS have introduced accessibility class(arcanist), if someone doesn't want to learn to play or have disabilities they can play arcanist with their big toe and still do a lot of damage

Hard agree. The obsession with hyper min-max buff specialization and inflated dps is a bad direction for the game. But it feels like this is a minority view.

AvidNecro · May 12

@ZOS_GinaBruno be so for real… Want to know how I know you don’t play necromancer? Necromancer PTS Patch Notes that need to be talked about...
https://youtube.com/live/F6kf61jtdzc?feature=share

nightbringer1993 · May 12

AvidNecro wrote: »

@ZOS_GinaBruno be so for real… Want to know how I know you don’t play necromancer? Necromancer PTS Patch Notes that need to be talked about...
https://youtube.com/live/F6kf61jtdzc?feature=share

I completly agree with you

And because of the way the necromancer is being treated, I feel like I am being heavily mistreated.

I cancelled my sub because I am tired of paying to get nerfed, and I don't want to play other classes.

The game is too depressive these days, and I am better off playing other games, because I want to play to have fun, and there is no fun is being kicked out or destroyed by other classes because I am using the necromancer class.

xylena · May 12

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

There has been a ton of evidence over the years to suggest that their visibility into what happens in-game is not nearly as robust as is commonly imagined.

Players usually understand metagaming better, but to say that players have more data than the devs do, in the era of "data-driven" everything everywhere, is completely nuts.

Devs ignore many fan favorite "simple solutions" precisely because they have more data than we players do, and can see the game from perspectives that we can't see (or understand).

Firstmep · May 12

I really would love to know why heart of flame is getting buffed next patch. Dk is by far the most played class in pvp rn, and a lot of these masteries are not going to help other classes to bridge the gap.

nightbringer1993 wrote: »

AvidNecro wrote: »

@ZOS_GinaBruno be so for real… Want to know how I know you don’t play necromancer? Necromancer PTS Patch Notes that need to be talked about...
https://youtube.com/live/F6kf61jtdzc?feature=share

I completly agree with you

And because of the way the necromancer is being treated, I feel like I am being heavily mistreated.

I cancelled my sub because I am tired of paying to get nerfed, and I don't want to play other classes.

The game is too depressive these days, and I am better off playing other games, because I want to play to have fun, and there is no fun is being kicked out or destroyed by other classes because I am using the necromancer class.

I'll say it again, you can already use corpseburster like that if you target the corpses blastbones and venom skull leaves, and the damage is nowhere insane or unfair.
So their reasoning already makes no sense.

SneaK · May 12

Just want to say pure NB is complete dumpster in Cyro against the DK meta, it’ll be the same against a WW meta if they have 40k+ HP. The NB masteries don’t need to be affected by battle spirit at all. There is nothing unique about them at this point. If you truly believe you’re going to fine tune as you go, start big, not small. You aren’t even giving incentive to play pure NB, therefore next to no one will give you any data points on it cause we’ll all have to subclass anyway. You’re going the wrong direction on many of these masteries.
@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_BrianWheeler @ZOS_Gilliam

Savagejack · May 13

It'd be super cute if heals and shields stopped scaling with max health in pvp. Also for sorcerer, please no more passives with stats based on having a pet or not.

dark_hunterxmg · May 13

Savagejack wrote: »

It'd be super cute if heals and shields stopped scaling with max health in pvp. Also for sorcerer, please no more passives with stats based on having a pet or not.

Better than scaling with weapon damage.
Good offense = good defense? How does that make sense? If anything healing and damage should be scaled inversely.

Demonwolff · May 13

xylena wrote: »

Devs ignore many fan favorite "simple solutions" precisely because they have more data than we players do, and can see the game from perspectives that we can't see (or understand).

This is a misnomer, You are assuming that players have no coding or game development experience or knowledge or that they have not done homework.

While this may hold true for some it does not apply to all.

On top of that its well known that for many years there was a "we know what players want, Better than players know" mentality.
Which is Simply untrue.

The reason many "fan favorite simple solutions" as you call them are ignored is because the Devs have already dedicated themselves to a direction and will double down on it because its is time and cost efficient. That's OK the Business aspect has to be appreciated and understood by the players.

The truly bothersome issue is going live with a system that does NOT work instead of rolling it back and taking another look at it.
That was the whole purpose behind seasons. Smaller Content released sporadically over a year so that they could address QOL and Bug fixes.
Yet we are still getting buggy updates compounding the issues already in the game.

I don' blame them of course, it is the nature of the beast to find bugs after a launch but take the time to look at the major concerns BEFORE it goes live (even if it means holding it back a little longer) and that will help lessen the issues that need to be fixed after.

I would rather have a game that brings joy and fun to my life not frustration and Irritability even if the content is a little slower to become available.

dark_hunterxmg · May 13

Demonwolff wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

Devs ignore many fan favorite "simple solutions" precisely because they have more data than we players do, and can see the game from perspectives that we can't see (or understand).

This is a misnomer, You are assuming that players have no coding or game development experience or knowledge or that they have not done homework.

While this may hold true for some it does not apply to all.

On top of that its well known that for many years there was a "we know what players want, Better than players know" mentality.
Which is Simply untrue.

The reason many "fan favorite simple solutions" as you call them are ignored is because the Devs have already dedicated themselves to a direction and will double down on it because its is time and cost efficient. That's OK the Business aspect has to be appreciated and understood by the players.

The truly bothersome issue is going live with a system that does NOT work instead of rolling it back and taking another look at it.
That was the whole purpose behind seasons. Smaller Content released sporadically over a year so that they could address QOL and Bug fixes.
Yet we are still getting buggy updates compounding the issues already in the game.

I don' blame them of course, it is the nature of the beast to find bugs after a launch but take the time to look at the major concerns BEFORE it goes live (even if it means holding it back a little longer) and that will help lessen the issues that need to be fixed after.

I would rather have a game that brings joy and fun to my life not frustration and Irritability even if the content is a little slower to become available.

This is pretty accurate. The new Werewolf was nearly the finished product on day 1. Bugs still exist that existed on day 1. No matter the changes suggested, the only things that got a adjusted were a few number values (reductions). No substantial changes have been made. We're out here testing their product for them for free, providing very good feedback and suggested fixes, but very little of it seems to have actually been used. The sparse notes from v12.0.4 indicate to me that whatever exists now on pts, will still exist on live.

ImPoStier · May 13

Prionyx wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

Lord_Hev wrote: »

Yes I would still take the game very seriously as a veteran player

I'll take this even further, the extreme power in the stat sheet makes me take the game less seriously. So many PvP engagements where I don't even need to try to win because I already know that my stat sheet is effectively giving me god mode. Wins feel unearned or even automated. Losses come from being outbuilt on paper, not outplayed in combat, which only reinforces players trying to avoid actually fighting to instead try to cheese the build system.

Prionyx wrote: »

That's a wildest take. Literally 100% games with good balance is balanced around what top players do and that's how things should be

Agree that was a weird take but they still need to balance the floor to something, because casuals and noobs need to be able to jump in and do something other than repeatedly die, especially in the absence of any ladder or rank system. Some players just don't seem to understand why raising the floor above the ceiling is a bad thing (one dimensional cheese spam meta).

I don't get it. Zos could half current DPS and it would still be enough for 100% of content. It would also be way more enjoyable since this way you could actually see mechanics and not just skip 90% of them with damage. ZOS have introduced accessibility class(arcanist), if someone doesn't want to learn to play or have disabilities they can play arcanist with their big toe and still do a lot of damage

Not 100%, the newest content gets made with the current dps in mind, all the newer trifectas would become impossible to most, a lot of dps checks would become almost impossible, they should up all the health pools of the power crept content

Demonwolff · May 13

ImPoStier wrote: »

Not 100%, the newest content gets made with the current dps in mind, all the newer trifectas would become impossible to most, a lot of dps checks would become almost impossible, they should up all the health pools of the power crept content

I'm assuming you mean content that is boring and not players.
You can not manage power creep by making players stronger.
The easy fix is make bring the old content into line with the new, However you do need to keep a balance so that new and inexperienced players can participate. Older content SHOULD be easier but not ridiculously so.

Savagejack · May 13

Better than scaling with weapon damage.
Good offense = good defense? How does that make sense? If anything healing and damage should be scaled inversely. [/quote]

Ah yeah, maybe. But currently most things do scale with weapon damage. In pvp, health-based heals and shields can become egregiously defensive.

xylena · May 14

Demonwolff wrote: »

This is a misnomer, You are assuming that players have no coding or game development experience or knowledge or that they have not done homework.

The popularity of this sentiment is exactly why devs shouldn't listen to players on most things. Zero of us understand the technical side of the game beyond what the devs tell us. I'm sure some players are pro game devs themselves but zero of them can actually see how ESO is coded.

Check out the infamous heal stacking poll thread and watch what happens when players try to solve a balance problem themselves. Special thanks to the near consensus of top tier PvPers advocating for a fan favorite "solution" that would've completely obliterated pug healing.

Wuuffyy · May 16

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Werewolves also benefit from a lot of things that aren't exclusive to just the Werewolf, and we don’t want to balance the Werewolf in isolation where you only get buffs from one skill line.

@ZOS_GinaBruno -

sure, I agree that class masteries and werewolf would allow for significantly more versatility, build expression, and overall flavor to werewolf. This especially is the case regarding utility/support wolves.

I request that we simply keep the base kit in mind (power level will speculatively become lower over time) as we bring class passives back into range for each given rework (i.e. 2 highly performant DPS increase masteries or 1 DPS and 1 defensive of the same become average/more flavor focused such as DK comparatively) and while making other adjustments.

Also:

Please add werewolf and vampire to Vengeance ^-^

ImPoStier · May 17

Demonwolff wrote: »

ImPoStier wrote: »

Not 100%, the newest content gets made with the current dps in mind, all the newer trifectas would become impossible to most, a lot of dps checks would become almost impossible, they should up all the health pools of the power crept content

I'm assuming you mean content that is boring and not players.
You can not manage power creep by making players stronger.
The easy fix is make bring the old content into line with the new, However you do need to keep a balance so that new and inexperienced players can participate. Older content SHOULD be easier but not ridiculously so.

What? I’m saying if they halved the damage the newest content designed with the current dps would become too hard, I don’t know what you are talking about, and that’s what I said they should up the health pools of the older content and I agree it should be easier, but not a complete joke

guarstompemoji · May 17

"...Werewolf healing isn’t really something we support ..."

No werewolf shamans?

Arc class design showed a great disconnect between how the healer role was thought to be played, and how it actually is. It'd be good to see more attention paid to all roles.

Reaving blows cp, for instance, would benefit from the heal remaining the same, but it receiving the pale order treatment. It's problematic when a single cp goes towards eliminating 33% of the roles in the game.

Also, seeing roles referred to in official posts as: dps, tank, and support...tank has been considered a support role. Is the intention to rename the healer role into support, instead?

Kazajhan · May 19

Arunei wrote: »

YOu CANNOT balance around what the above-average or top players can do.

Do people not remember U35? That whole debacle happened because ZOS attempted to raise the floor by lowering the ceiling. What happened, though? Who was it that was adversely affected by that? It was the average or below-average player hit the hardest.

Yes, I remember U35. Both Templar and Werewolf got nerfed, PvE got harder, because there were problems in PvP. I worked hard to advance, only lose 30% dps because some people in some segment of the game I don't engage in complained. I don't meta, there's this RP thing...

I was wondering at which point I would become disappointed about U50, and yeah, I'm there. Wow, werewolf is going to get some positive attention after 15 updates of nerf after nerf after nerf (not to mention the Templar nerfs).

Was going to log in tonight on PTS to see how things were going with werewolf, but...why?

Oh yeah, for the record werewolves should still have real howls, and some gushing blood when eating...but...

Bottom line, I've thought for years that this game should have a somewhat different system for PvP. Instead, all of balance seems to be centered on endgame/PvP where players meta and minmax and find holes in the algorithms to pwn their opponents, while some of us that'd like to just advance, play a character, engage with lore, and get through advanced PvE can't, because we're nerfed, and gear is locked behind an RNG and endurance trials.

Pinktraining · May 19

The Werewolf in the test server is stronger in PvE than in the live server. Its DPS is even equal to the live server's endgame-PvE builds (at least 120K or higher), not to mention it can provide the team with permanent damage buffs and other abilities that are not available in the live server. I really don't understand why so many people are complaining that the Werewolf in PvE on the test server is weak.

Wuuffyy · May 19

Pinktraining wrote: »

The Werewolf in the test server is stronger in PvE than in the live server. Its DPS is even equal to the live server's endgame-PvE builds (at least 120K or higher), not to mention it can provide the team with permanent damage buffs and other abilities that are not available in the live server. I really don't understand why so many people are complaining that the Werewolf in PvE on the test server is weak.

TANK
-we don't have a ranged taunt
-we don't have a pull
-we have to block to taunt which just remains awkward as hekk. They could just moved power from a passive into another passive and then made a passive to 'taunt when doing x' so DPS could still pick tank morphs and not taunt
-we cannot apply major force
-our ult isn't sufficient for support sets (i.e. our expending ult does not net major slayer off MA etc.)

HEALER
-we can't/aren't allowed to heal in any real capacity (33% of roles gone)

DPS
-our DPS is good at 180k without Signet running but even then only while cheesy so-and-so like Huntsman (or Selene, same-same) which places our horrid cleave at an even worse level (we are ALL ST when much of new content calls for cleave)
-people want us worse than arc with all of its cleave and utility (which means the incentive is to worsen our damage back to meme levels)

-you also think Nightblade is weak and Necro is OP (they're both terrible, necro is worse)

Vaqual · May 19

Kazajhan wrote: »

Arunei wrote: »

YOu CANNOT balance around what the above-average or top players can do.

Do people not remember U35? That whole debacle happened because ZOS attempted to raise the floor by lowering the ceiling. What happened, though? Who was it that was adversely affected by that? It was the average or below-average player hit the hardest.

Yes, I remember U35. Both Templar and Werewolf got nerfed, PvE got harder, because there were problems in PvP. I worked hard to advance, only lose 30% dps because some people in some segment of the game I don't engage in complained. I don't meta, there's this RP thing...

I was wondering at which point I would become disappointed about U50, and yeah, I'm there. Wow, werewolf is going to get some positive attention after 15 updates of nerf after nerf after nerf (not to mention the Templar nerfs).

Was going to log in tonight on PTS to see how things were going with werewolf, but...why?

Oh yeah, for the record werewolves should still have real howls, and some gushing blood when eating...but...

Bottom line, I've thought for years that this game should have a somewhat different system for PvP. Instead, all of balance seems to be centered on endgame/PvP where players meta and minmax and find holes in the algorithms to pwn their opponents, while some of us that'd like to just advance, play a character, engage with lore, and get through advanced PvE can't, because we're nerfed, and gear is locked behind an RNG and endurance trials.

PvE encounters can be adjusted if a shift in average player power is necessary, because NPCs don't care about being treated fairly.

PvP is always relying on a reasonable balance between classes, because players care about being treated fairly.

PvP balance is objectively more important. It is simply not possible to balance a game around players that do not exhaust the potential of the available tools. This always results in extreme power in the hands of ambitious players and always sours or erodes any semblance of challenge.

CatalinaWineMixer2 · May 19

Vaqual wrote: »

Kazajhan wrote: »

Arunei wrote: »

YOu CANNOT balance around what the above-average or top players can do.

Do people not remember U35? That whole debacle happened because ZOS attempted to raise the floor by lowering the ceiling. What happened, though? Who was it that was adversely affected by that? It was the average or below-average player hit the hardest.

Yes, I remember U35. Both Templar and Werewolf got nerfed, PvE got harder, because there were problems in PvP. I worked hard to advance, only lose 30% dps because some people in some segment of the game I don't engage in complained. I don't meta, there's this RP thing...

I was wondering at which point I would become disappointed about U50, and yeah, I'm there. Wow, werewolf is going to get some positive attention after 15 updates of nerf after nerf after nerf (not to mention the Templar nerfs).

Was going to log in tonight on PTS to see how things were going with werewolf, but...why?

Oh yeah, for the record werewolves should still have real howls, and some gushing blood when eating...but...

Bottom line, I've thought for years that this game should have a somewhat different system for PvP. Instead, all of balance seems to be centered on endgame/PvP where players meta and minmax and find holes in the algorithms to pwn their opponents, while some of us that'd like to just advance, play a character, engage with lore, and get through advanced PvE can't, because we're nerfed, and gear is locked behind an RNG and endurance trials.

PvE encounters can be adjusted if a shift in average player power is necessary, because NPCs don't care about being treated fairly.

PvP is always relying on a reasonable balance between classes, because players care about being treated fairly.

PvP balance is objectively more important. It is simply not possible to balance a game around players that do not exhaust the potential of the available tools. This always results in extreme power in the hands of ambitious players and always sours or erodes any semblance of challenge.

PvE encounters are not the problem. The overpowered abuse of Subclassing is.

PvP is not and has not in any way whatsoever been balanced. And it will never be balanced. It is not possible to balance a no rules cherry picking system (Subclass)

PvP is not more important than the rest of the game. Ambitious players do not like Vengeance because it is fair. And you actually have to play against Skill, not Gear and exploits.

The top echelon of players being catered to needs to stop in this game. Its been going on for almost 11 years. They are absolutely responsible for the current combat disaster as are the Devs who refuse to listen to anyone else and institute rules and take back control of their own broken out of control combat system. People aren't just quitting PvP over it, theyre leaving the game.

Vaqual · May 19

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

Vaqual wrote: »

Kazajhan wrote: »

Arunei wrote: »

YOu CANNOT balance around what the above-average or top players can do.

Do people not remember U35? That whole debacle happened because ZOS attempted to raise the floor by lowering the ceiling. What happened, though? Who was it that was adversely affected by that? It was the average or below-average player hit the hardest.

Yes, I remember U35. Both Templar and Werewolf got nerfed, PvE got harder, because there were problems in PvP. I worked hard to advance, only lose 30% dps because some people in some segment of the game I don't engage in complained. I don't meta, there's this RP thing...

I was wondering at which point I would become disappointed about U50, and yeah, I'm there. Wow, werewolf is going to get some positive attention after 15 updates of nerf after nerf after nerf (not to mention the Templar nerfs).

Was going to log in tonight on PTS to see how things were going with werewolf, but...why?

Oh yeah, for the record werewolves should still have real howls, and some gushing blood when eating...but...

Bottom line, I've thought for years that this game should have a somewhat different system for PvP. Instead, all of balance seems to be centered on endgame/PvP where players meta and minmax and find holes in the algorithms to pwn their opponents, while some of us that'd like to just advance, play a character, engage with lore, and get through advanced PvE can't, because we're nerfed, and gear is locked behind an RNG and endurance trials.

PvE encounters can be adjusted if a shift in average player power is necessary, because NPCs don't care about being treated fairly.

PvP is always relying on a reasonable balance between classes, because players care about being treated fairly.

PvP balance is objectively more important. It is simply not possible to balance a game around players that do not exhaust the potential of the available tools. This always results in extreme power in the hands of ambitious players and always sours or erodes any semblance of challenge.

PvE encounters are not the problem. The overpowered abuse of Subclassing is.

PvP is not and has not in any way whatsoever been balanced. And it will never be balanced. It is not possible to balance a no rules cherry picking system (Subclass)

PvP is not more important than the rest of the game. Ambitious players do not like Vengeance because it is fair. And you actually have to play against Skill, not Gear and exploits.

The top echelon of players being catered to needs to stop in this game. Its been going on for almost 11 years. They are absolutely responsible for the current combat disaster as are the Devs who refuse to listen to anyone else and institute rules and take back control of their own broken out of control combat system. People aren't just quitting PvP over it, theyre leaving the game.

Some things, like combat balance, require continuous effort. Also, players have been pointing out ZOS's mistakes at every step. The current issues aren't the fault of "top players", they are not being catered too in a meaningful or satisfying way either. I am not saying ZOS hasn't also produced good changes. But a large portion of the most pressing problems are coming from short-sighted fixes and deliberate shake-ups.

It appears to me that you have one thing completely backwards though. Intelligent PvPers by and large want fair PvP. To excel among worthwhile competition. No one gives a hoot about a low-MMR-stomps. But fair doesn't mean boring, simple or one-dimensional. The people who insist on keeping broken and dysfunctional tools in the game are predominantly inexperienced players. That can hardly be a basis for blaming anyone who chooses to abuse them, to put the finger in the wound.

While ZOS seems to be on a good track, we see bad ideas making it to live in real time (see U50 PTS). Read the feedback. If you have any idea about some of the personalities behind the feedback, you will recognize that the "top players" are not the ones pushing for the most idiotic changes.

Kazajhan · May 19

Vaqual wrote: »

PvP balance is objectively more important. It is simply not possible to balance a game around players that do not exhaust the potential of the available tools. This always results in extreme power in the hands of ambitious players and always sours or erodes any semblance of challenge.

You're making my argument for me you know. You must be a PvPer, because you mention "players who that do not exhaust the potential of all the available tools." You know, not everyone can.

No, not everybody has the time to grind away at the most difficult content. No, PvP balance is not objectively more important. If you want to get really objective about it,

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

Vaqual wrote: »

Kazajhan wrote: »

Arunei wrote: »

YOu CANNOT balance around what the above-average or top players can do.

Do people not remember U35? That whole debacle happened because ZOS attempted to raise the floor by lowering the ceiling. What happened, though? Who was it that was adversely affected by that? It was the average or below-average player hit the hardest.

Yes, I remember U35. Both Templar and Werewolf got nerfed, PvE got harder, because there were problems in PvP. I worked hard to advance, only lose 30% dps because some people in some segment of the game I don't engage in complained. I don't meta, there's this RP thing...

I was wondering at which point I would become disappointed about U50, and yeah, I'm there. Wow, werewolf is going to get some positive attention after 15 updates of nerf after nerf after nerf (not to mention the Templar nerfs).

Was going to log in tonight on PTS to see how things were going with werewolf, but...why?

Oh yeah, for the record werewolves should still have real howls, and some gushing blood when eating...but...

Bottom line, I've thought for years that this game should have a somewhat different system for PvP. Instead, all of balance seems to be centered on endgame/PvP where players meta and minmax and find holes in the algorithms to pwn their opponents, while some of us that'd like to just advance, play a character, engage with lore, and get through advanced PvE can't, because we're nerfed, and gear is locked behind an RNG and endurance trials.

PvE encounters can be adjusted if a shift in average player power is necessary, because NPCs don't care about being treated fairly.

PvP is always relying on a reasonable balance between classes, because players care about being treated fairly.

PvP balance is objectively more important. It is simply not possible to balance a game around players that do not exhaust the potential of the available tools. This always results in extreme power in the hands of ambitious players and always sours or erodes any semblance of challenge.

PvE encounters are not the problem. The overpowered abuse of Subclassing is.

PvP is not and has not in any way whatsoever been balanced. And it will never be balanced. It is not possible to balance a no rules cherry picking system (Subclass)

PvP is not more important than the rest of the game. Ambitious players do not like Vengeance because it is fair. And you actually have to play against Skill, not Gear and exploits.

The top echelon of players being catered to needs to stop in this game. Its been going on for almost 11 years. They are absolutely responsible for the current combat disaster as are the Devs who refuse to listen to anyone else and institute rules and take back control of their own broken out of control combat system. People aren't just quitting PvP over it, theyre leaving the game.

One way to look at it is that 10 years of ESO Plus for me, plus buying Crowns, has been subsidizing a very expensive game where development caters to only the top tier of players, and the rest of the players get served continual disappointment, promises it will be better, and are expected to log into the flashy Skinner box to get their dopamine surges.

Oops, maybe that was objective or something.

hoangdz · May 19

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

Ambitious players do not like Vengeance because it is fair. And you actually have to play against Skill, not Gear and exploits.

Ambitious players will still excel in Vengeance against less experienced ones, though. The campaign only removes gear and CP, not mechanics honed through years of PvP. If you never mastered PvP mechanics in normal campaigns, you aren't magically better in Vengeance.

The real reasons why they do not like Vengeance are due to:

1) The zergy nature of the campaign, where AoE abilities are capped to 3 targets
2) The overly simplistic abilities. There are still no morphs, just the basic version of a skill that either fully locks you into a magicka or stamina archetype.
3) The lack of full customization. I want the ability to change my stats at will, not use a fixed template provided by ZOS.

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

The top echelon of players being catered to needs to stop in this game. Its been going on for almost 11 years. They are absolutely responsible for the current combat disaster as are the Devs who refuse to listen to anyone else and institute rules and take back control of their own broken out of control combat system. People aren't just quitting PvP over it, theyre leaving the game.

I do not understand why you shifted the blame to the top 0.1% of players, when they are usually the ones who diagnose a problem the quickest among the general playerbase. Historically, they have played a major role in giving feedback about potential cancerous metas on the PTS that could have manifested on the live server. Do you know what happened? ZOS largely ignored them, or at the very least, made little to zero meaningful changes to prevent them from occuring. Even if they did listen, they ended up making the wrong changes anyway.