Best Of
Re: Official Night Market Feedback Thread
Feedback #8, this one's rather negative...
I made an attempt to put together a guild run to do the full gameplay loop -- Brazen, Argent, Gilded, and then Opulent...
So, for one, not everyone had the relics. Okay, that was on me for not making that a clear cutoff. Had to scramble to replace...
For two, we were all together for the Brazen -> Argent part... but for the Gilded, 2/3 of the dungeon groups ended up not actually doing the dungeons because people wanted to keep their Argent keys for other groups that require having the Argents done. This was incredibly complicated to deal with and very unfun. Keys need to be able to stack so that peoples gameplay isn't a competition between different groups that have different requirements, because not every group is going to do the gameplay loop in its totality due to the time it takes. I don't want to force people to have the gold keys for next week, I enjoy the concept of doing the full gameplay loop, but I'm probably going to have to just for simplicity's sake.
Edit: I also had a hard time getting people to fill because of people holding their keys. The relics is a hurdle and then the competition of group requirements is another hurdle, making it harder to find fills than it needs to be. The keys need to stack or the unlocks need to be permanent.
I made an attempt to put together a guild run to do the full gameplay loop -- Brazen, Argent, Gilded, and then Opulent...
So, for one, not everyone had the relics. Okay, that was on me for not making that a clear cutoff. Had to scramble to replace...
For two, we were all together for the Brazen -> Argent part... but for the Gilded, 2/3 of the dungeon groups ended up not actually doing the dungeons because people wanted to keep their Argent keys for other groups that require having the Argents done. This was incredibly complicated to deal with and very unfun. Keys need to be able to stack so that peoples gameplay isn't a competition between different groups that have different requirements, because not every group is going to do the gameplay loop in its totality due to the time it takes. I don't want to force people to have the gold keys for next week, I enjoy the concept of doing the full gameplay loop, but I'm probably going to have to just for simplicity's sake.
Edit: I also had a hard time getting people to fill because of people holding their keys. The relics is a hurdle and then the competition of group requirements is another hurdle, making it harder to find fills than it needs to be. The keys need to stack or the unlocks need to be permanent.
Soarora
17
Re: Why is everyone so adverse to grouping for NM?
The game always had group content, we have dungeons, trials and group arenas, it can't morph into something it already is.thedocbwarren wrote: »No story content is my reason and it's not the same gameplay as the story-line. I can imagine some people came to ESO, like I did, looking for a new elder scrolls game like the single-player games. Seeing the game morph to group tasks and non-story-like play is shocking and disappointing. Just my point of view.
The person you quoted mentioned the lack of story when it comes to the Night Market. And I agree. Dungeons and trials have a story (even if it might not be super complex sometimes), and most of all a logical story progression. The Night Market on the other hand shows us 3 factions that have some kind of identity label slapped to them, but it never plays any real role when it comes to the actuals tasks the player needs to do. It's basically always just running around killing everything, and playing some arcade-like games - not sure how that benefits a faction that's allegedly about knowledge or about wealth.
And then, the explanation for the whole Market existing is nothing beyond "Woah! Mysterious daedric realm!" - and that's it. This is what I'd rather find a little concerning - the writing quality basically, how story and quests do not fit together at all, but it all just feels like some random facade slapped upon random tasks.
(Which also slowly begins to bore me personally as a lore- and story-focused player; I've been playing with random group finder groups for a week now, exploration was fun for the first days, but now I'm slowly getting bored because there's no progressing story, but it's all just random - which can't really keep my interest for a longer time. Though I'm aware of course that that's an entirely personal and subjective thing, and other people might not mind that at all. And that's okay - everyone likes different things, and there should be content for different tastes and playstyles. So I have no problem with the Night Market existing, or being hard, or being group content, at all. The only thing I find weird is the disconnect between gameplay and the alleged background story/lore, where really nothing fits together.)
Though I'm not sure if this entirely fits this thread, because it's not about solo or group content, but about how this content was designed and written.
One other thing to point out is that, yes the game has always had group content, but it was either group content that had rewards that was returning (such as mayhem and any similiar events) or the group content itself was always going to be available.
Making hard group content that is leaving, even after a certain time frame, with uncertainty if the rewards are going to return after the initial three appearances (once for each faction) just makes people want to get those rewards before they miss out on them entirely.
That was my reason for doing the NM, but I just don't really care anymore. I already have a shiny green dye, and while I would like a new one to play around with, as well as getting the Night's den fully upgraded, I just don't feel up to facing the precincts.
It feels more like a chore than anything fun to me, so, while I might go back in in a week or two, at the moment, I just don't really have any motivation.
The lack of a good story is also a reason behind my lack of motivation.
Re: U50 Feedback Thread for Class Mastery
YandereGirlfriend wrote: »Static Reverberation
This passive was a huge problem for pvp week 1. It was in a fine state after getting adjusted to 0.5 seconds. Its now back to being too powerful with 0.3 seconds cool down and being buffed to base 5% proc rate.
Part of the problem comes from sorc being too good at being able to proc it. 5% proc base doesnt sound like much but consider that a regular status effect build can deal up to 10 instances of seperate damage per second. For example
1-Vateshran destro proc
2-Burning status effect from vateshran
3-Light attack
4-Concussion from thread of war
5-Crushing shock (frost)
6-Crushing shock (fire)
7-Crushing shock (shock)
8-Chill from crushing shock
9-Burning from crushing shock
10- Concussion from crushing shock
11-Hurricane
10+ instances of seperate damage in a single second with a 5% base proc chance at full hp, skyrocketing to a certainty at lower health thresholds. This isnt just limited to this specific scenario either, bound armamant is 4 instance of seperate damage by itself and is by itself a burst damage and the burst damage having near certainty to proc additional damage turns it from a burst to an easy execute. In fact it turns basically everything in sorcs arsenal to an execute extremely easily.
Malevolent Promise was excluded from pvp for being too war crimey, well, this passive is the actual war crime. Please consider adding a once per second clause to it with battle spirit active. Proccing an extra instance of damage every second easily makes it one of the best pure class passives in the game, simply makes it less toxic by preventing it from being oppressive in pvp.
TBH, this is more of a condemnation of how status effects and ticky-tack micro ticks of damage have gotten out of control in recent updates than it says anything about Sorc itself. The only actual Sorc skill even in here is Hurricane.
Would much prefer that the Vate Crutch Staff, Ele Sus, and Force Pulse get nerfed before anything else happens. Why do we have things like Rapid Strikes having nerfed status effect chance per tick while Force Pulse skates with the full Single Target Direct Damage multiplier? Seems like nerfing that down to Single Target DOT levels would be a nice place to start balancing. Then we can remove the free cast status of Ele Sus and perhaps delete the auto status effect proc as well.
I think maybe just nerfing ele sus to cost 1-2k mag would be a fine nerf. I wouldnt wanna see the 7.5 seconds status procs removed because its such a unique thing but yes its a really strong skill, maybe adjusting the proc rate to 8-10? Dunno.
I am and honestly have always been a fan of the status effect playstyle and i'll be honest what i described has also been possible a few years back, its just that the buff to status effects uhhh was it last year, in combination with signet made the playstyle a lot more viable, but static reverbation might be too synergistic with the playstyle and sorc in general. I mean, 4 hits on BA itself, 5 with la and did i mention each hit of BA can proc sundered individually and has higher than normal sundered proc rate not mentioned on the skill itself?, yeah thats up to 9 individual damage instances with nothing but a light attack and a single skill
When it comes to Static Reverberation, the build matters I think. The cost of running Static Reverberation can't be neglected. Because what do you choose? Conservation and Static? That means you lose a lot of base damage from Font of Power that makes all your other stuff hit for less, and if you want to run Font and Static Reverb together for full offense, then you have sustain issues unless you build around it, thus once again losing damage elsewhere.
I'd rather Static Reverberation did not exist, because I see it being broken in the hands of some builds, or useless on other, more burst oriented ones.
To be fair that's true for most classes with 2 offensive masteries.
Then that only accentuates my point. In the case of Sorcerer it rings doubly bitterly because Conservation of Energy is not only the sustain, but also the convenience of exporting the effect of the awful Dark Magic line to any other skill. The sustain is one thing, and I could do without it. The convenience though is difficult to ignore.
That's my point too, if you're picking Static over any combination of the main 3, you're shooting yourself in the foot. It requires too much investment to make it work, and is easily countered by purge/defensive players that don't fall below 80% ever. You need the upfront damage to get these people low enough and this Mastery doesn't help, while the others do.
- Conservation means I don't need a sustain set or food, so more health/damage, while healing every cast and getting actual 100% uptime on the 10% max resource buff. This basically brings back Hardened Ward upfront heal meta, except now you get it on Streak, Bound Armaments, Curse, list goes on. Very diverse Mastery you'd be crazy not to run for how much it offers.
- Font is just a massive powerspike, 30k resources is easy to hit for 20% w/s damage, massively improving heals/proc sets/damage, and only gets better if you're going the Max Mag stacking route.
- Defense is a constant 15% shield (PVP), and 6% w/s damage for you and your group. You always have a buffer to your health of 4,500 (assuming 30k HP) that constantly refreshes like a mini parry and might go higher via Minor/Major Vitality or CP. This thing is a cross between the offense and defense of Conservation and Font.
Outside a Glass Cannon, why would I gamble with Reverb?
And I'm not saying Static Reverb is bad, I'm happy with this version of it, but it's just not good for PVP in the current state, it's a dummy parse Mastery. The others are much more versatile and competitive. It's the same reason I wouldn't run the NB or Necro Mastery's that are based on missing health. Those need some type of buff like Reverb to give a bonus at all times, that increases in proportion to their health.
Re: Shattered Paths Signet
Mythics should be powerful, it would be nice to see some of the less used mythics get some attention to make them more valued.
Powerful in PvE at least.
When Velothi was on the PTS back in the day it was grossly overtuned and received a comparable reaction to Signet from PvP mains. The wise devs of those days then chose to make it PvE-only with "Against Monsters" which completely solved the issue. The PvE crowd could go nuts with a fun new toy while the PvP community dodged what would have been a comically overpowered boondoggle.
TLDR; "Against Monsters" is The Way.
Re: Official Night Market Feedback Thread
It's the opposite, actually, and multi-factionalism can turbo-charge quest sharing.The different factions mean you have people in your group that you can't share quests with, and so they want to go one way, whilst you want to go another.
So, the minor quests in the districts can never be shared, no matter what.
But having different people from different factions actually makes quest sharing easier. So let's say you have 3 people, each who can pick up a different quest from their faction leader. Let's say Alice gets the Argent quest, Bob gets the Brazen quest, and Frank gets the Fleet quest. So if all three people are in the same faction, they could do all 3 quests, but they'd have to do it one at a time, like overland world bosses. A shares her quest to everyone, they do it, turn it in, and then B picks up and shares his quest, and they all do it, and then F picks up and shares their quest. Three quests, but only one at a time. But if they all belonged to different factions, then they can all pick up their quest, and all share it, and they could have all 3 quests in their quest journals at the same time.
So faction diversity in a group actually helps makes quest sharing easier and smoother. The problem is that none of this is intuitive. You can't tell by looking at your quest journal if the Argent quest that you have was originally picked up by a Ruckus player or by an Eyes player--the quests all have the same identical quest IDs, regardless of which faction picked it up, and the faction is a property of the quest that is hidden from the user. And even if the user wanted to manually note which faction shared which quest, you can't easily see which faction someone belongs to (unless they tell you or you pay attention to where they go for quests turn-ins) so even if you know that Argent came from Alice, you don't know if that's an Argent quest sourced from Eyes or from Ruckus.
Re: Concerns About ESO’s Future Direction and Solo Player Experience
Greetings all,
After removing a handful of comments, we would like to ask that all members of the community please be sure to keep all posts stay on topic, remain civil and constructive, while also staying within the guidelines of the Community Rules.
Regards,
-Greg-
After removing a handful of comments, we would like to ask that all members of the community please be sure to keep all posts stay on topic, remain civil and constructive, while also staying within the guidelines of the Community Rules.
Regards,
-Greg-
Re: Night Market has made Group Finder come alive
Night Market also shown Group Finder is useless as players simply fake their roles. I've just started finder for skirmish requiring 2 tanks, 2 healers and 10 dd's. Ended up with 2 healers and 10 dd's.
Miracle? No, two players simply changed roles to tank, joined, and changer back to dd's.
Zenimax, why don't u make roles mean ANYTHING not only in veteran dungeons/trials? Why don't you make role a part of build, so it can't be this easy to change?
I made a gilded group requiring a tank and a healer and posted it. A few seconds later it was entirely full, and the last guy who joined said "you sure you don't want a tank?" and I was confused, because I absolutely wanted a tank. So even though I'd set required roles, and no one was marked as a tank, it allowed two damage dealers to join. He was nice and figured it was just normal ZOS coding and hopped out, but when I attempted to relist the group it would not let me. I never figured out what witchcraft needed to happen in order for me to relist the group requiring a tank. Ended up having to pass leader to one of the others in the group who made it successfully. So it seems like I was bugged after making the group and someone dropping out. Was definitely frustrating, but I'm glad other players can help compensate for the bugs, even though they shouldn't have to.
Re: Why is everyone so adverse to grouping for NM?
The game always had group content, we have dungeons, trials and group arenas, it can't morph into something it already is.thedocbwarren wrote: »No story content is my reason and it's not the same gameplay as the story-line. I can imagine some people came to ESO, like I did, looking for a new elder scrolls game like the single-player games. Seeing the game morph to group tasks and non-story-like play is shocking and disappointing. Just my point of view.
The person you quoted mentioned the lack of story when it comes to the Night Market. And I agree. Dungeons and trials have a story (even if it might not be super complex sometimes), and most of all a logical story progression. The Night Market on the other hand shows us 3 factions that have some kind of identity label slapped to them, but it never plays any real role when it comes to the actuals tasks the player needs to do. It's basically always just running around killing everything, and playing some arcade-like games - not sure how that benefits a faction that's allegedly about knowledge or about wealth.
And then, the explanation for the whole Market existing is nothing beyond "Woah! Mysterious daedric realm!" - and that's it. This is what I'd rather find a little concerning - the writing quality basically, how story and quests do not fit together at all, but it all just feels like some random facade slapped upon random tasks.
(Which also slowly begins to bore me personally as a lore- and story-focused player; I've been playing with random group finder groups for a week now, exploration was fun for the first days, but now I'm slowly getting bored because there's no progressing story, but it's all just random - which can't really keep my interest for a longer time. Though I'm aware of course that that's an entirely personal and subjective thing, and other people might not mind that at all. And that's okay - everyone likes different things, and there should be content for different tastes and playstyles. So I have no problem with the Night Market existing, or being hard, or being group content, at all. The only thing I find weird is the disconnect between gameplay and the alleged background story/lore, where really nothing fits together.)
Though I'm not sure if this entirely fits this thread, because it's not about solo or group content, but about how this content was designed and written.
Thank you for the follow up, it articulates my concern I was trying to express. I do like the market look and "lobby" scene but the playstyle isn't what I hoped we would get. Whatever is planned for the new "content" on its way later I am questioning if it's story content with lore, etc. I really hope this game doesn't transition to task-like, mobile game-like, and minimal story/lore investment. I understand the calls "this is an mmo" and maybe it is, but the original content in this game feels very much like an Elder Scrolls game up to a point as of recent. It felt like a great game to play after playing ES: 3/4/5 and have something that fits in the lore (up to a certain point in time.)
And nothing I say is suggesting no group or PVP or similar. Totally fine to have for online game, I just noticed a very big change in direction that seems to diverge quite a bit.
Re: The Night Market event is already dead?
All event content loses half the players in the first week this is normal ESO behavior.
I do think ZOS needs to build the content so it's dynamic in nature so can auto adjust based on live population, looking at you Harrowstorms
I do think ZOS needs to build the content so it's dynamic in nature so can auto adjust based on live population, looking at you Harrowstorms
