Best Of
Re: Daily login for Tomes should be counted automatically
SilverBride wrote: »Players shouldn't miss getting credit for something they did just because they forgot to open Tomes, go to Challenges, go to Seasonal then click on the Challenge. They did it for the daily login rewards so they should be able to do it for this, too.
You don't miss getting credit if you forget to claim it manually for a few days. I did forget to claim it on one account and then just had to click the things a few times, got credit for all days. Same with the resource gathering challenges. If you forget to claim one, it starts counting towards the next one already in the background. Now the auto claim function is of course a different matter.
This. I forgot a few days and could just click on them all at once.
Re: U50 Feedback Thread for Challenge Difficulty
So, to answer some questions on Challenge Difficulty and instancing combat. This is going to be a little bit technical to hopefully explain the limitations from that perspective.
Everything in the game has a "weight" to it. This includes monsters (very weight heavy), interactable objects (these very but can be weight heavy), etc. Weight is determined by how much information is stored in a given object. I mention this because we have formulas for how much "weight" we can attribute to a given zone or instance of a zone and that is based on the intended player cap. So, for instance, Overland zones generally have no weight restrictions because we expect a lot of players in those zones so the weight attributed to the zone is justified and won't adversely affect the server. It gets much more tricky in situations where we expect reduced players in a given zone. The most restrictive are solo instances or fight spaces. We have a lot of development tools we use to make sure we do not exceed weight capacities in these spaces so it should feel seamless to players.
Each zone is controlled on the backend by something that determines which of our servers will spin up which zones when new copies are needed. In Greymoor, we saw the effects of the zones being spun up were not correctly attributing weight. Trials would spin up on weight heavy controllers which would result in adverse conditions in any zone connected to that controller. Our engineers took great pains to reorganize the code in these controllers to make sure the zones were even and weight was correctly distributed.
I bring this up to highlight the technical aspects of how the game operates from a monster and zone perspective to further illustrate that spinning up new zones based on difficulty without weight concerns and attribution would be extremely detrimental to the entire game. Needing to essentially double all of the available zones in the game without regard to population and weight would mean the entire server would have some pretty major issues regardless of where you would be playing. Even in Delves and Public Dungeons, locations that were not created with these concerns in mind, would potentially be breaking for the server.
We want Challenge Difficulty to be a fun experience for players and, while most of the feedback is regarding the desire for us not to split players from a design standpoint, the technical concerns are most likely bigger than that. This is not said to dismiss feedback but more provide context.
Please DO keep providing feedback. We have some fixes in the works coming for CD. Mainly around the calculations we are making on the backend so that player damage is more in line with expectations but that is not exhaustive and we continue to monitor things. We are taking a look at the Master difficulty in particular as thats where I think most folks will find their groove and we want to make that as smooth as possible.
Everything in the game has a "weight" to it. This includes monsters (very weight heavy), interactable objects (these very but can be weight heavy), etc. Weight is determined by how much information is stored in a given object. I mention this because we have formulas for how much "weight" we can attribute to a given zone or instance of a zone and that is based on the intended player cap. So, for instance, Overland zones generally have no weight restrictions because we expect a lot of players in those zones so the weight attributed to the zone is justified and won't adversely affect the server. It gets much more tricky in situations where we expect reduced players in a given zone. The most restrictive are solo instances or fight spaces. We have a lot of development tools we use to make sure we do not exceed weight capacities in these spaces so it should feel seamless to players.
Each zone is controlled on the backend by something that determines which of our servers will spin up which zones when new copies are needed. In Greymoor, we saw the effects of the zones being spun up were not correctly attributing weight. Trials would spin up on weight heavy controllers which would result in adverse conditions in any zone connected to that controller. Our engineers took great pains to reorganize the code in these controllers to make sure the zones were even and weight was correctly distributed.
I bring this up to highlight the technical aspects of how the game operates from a monster and zone perspective to further illustrate that spinning up new zones based on difficulty without weight concerns and attribution would be extremely detrimental to the entire game. Needing to essentially double all of the available zones in the game without regard to population and weight would mean the entire server would have some pretty major issues regardless of where you would be playing. Even in Delves and Public Dungeons, locations that were not created with these concerns in mind, would potentially be breaking for the server.
We want Challenge Difficulty to be a fun experience for players and, while most of the feedback is regarding the desire for us not to split players from a design standpoint, the technical concerns are most likely bigger than that. This is not said to dismiss feedback but more provide context.
Please DO keep providing feedback. We have some fixes in the works coming for CD. Mainly around the calculations we are making on the backend so that player damage is more in line with expectations but that is not exhaustive and we continue to monitor things. We are taking a look at the Master difficulty in particular as thats where I think most folks will find their groove and we want to make that as smooth as possible.
ZOS_Finn
20
Re: April 20th Vengeance Only..
ToddIngram wrote: »Its not just that they disable Grey Host in that week once more, but also with Update 50 and the big PvP reward system, the first 30!!!! ranks are basically Vengeance only rewards. They keep forcing it onto us, they do not listen, that the majority of PvP players do not want Vengeance. Its just PvE people liking it, because then they can just jump in, change nothing and be good at it.
When Vengeance PvE rules for Trifecta btw? I don't want to change my build for that and I expect to be able to do it with absolutely no effort, thank you.
This.
I honestly think their analytics were skewed by PvE people. Surely they compared peoples PvP timeplayers when looking at the results too... right......r...i..g...h..t...?
The only analytics that matter to ZOS are the profit related metrics. And vengeance is far less expensive to maintain than the game ZOS originally created. The problem is vengeance will not last. The PvE community won't play it long term and the vast majority PvP community won't touch vengeance ever again. Vengeance will fail and ZOS will replace Grey Host with a single keep map and call it a good day. ...and I bet there are still people at ZOS that don't understand why such a large portion of their player base isn't happy with them anymore.
Strongly disagree. Thinking objectivley, I can't begin to image the payroll alone ZoS has spent on trying to fix Cyrodiil. While I don't think Veng will have the playerbase that they are hoping for (once things level out and people get their rewards from it), I do think Veng is the PERFECT entry to Cyrodiil camp. Sure, there will be a handfull of people from Grayhost that go over there because they run solo, find GH to sweaty, etc, but I assume the vast majority of people who have been sticking it out in GH since.... ages ago... will still be in GH. I don't expect Veng to be poplocked.. or even remotley full to be honest.
Going to a one keep map.. with ball groups from all factions... etc.. etc.. I'd have to see this play out. My first though is who thought of this and... why are we doing this... but I try to be open to new ideas. Maybe this will be the most bad ass one keep non stop fights pure chaos we all have been waiting for.. maybe it's a total disaster.. no idea.
I do think if they announced it though the pushback would be brutal and people wouldn't really give it a chance so... I'd be shocked if they pushed forward with this.
LadyGP
4
Re: April 20th Vengeance Only..
Ive pvped since 2014 and I think Vengeance is better pvpmode then the "normal" pvp you see in cyrodiil these days, its 99.9% about what sets you use and what class you are, very little about skill. Vengeance is mostly about skill.
olsborg
4
Re: is there a list somewhere of the hidden pre-requisites to obtaining furniture loot?
spantifical wrote: »Thanks for the shoutout and enjoy the list!! Hope it helps.
And pardon the mess in my libraries....placing books is such a pain. They're sorted by source in alphabetical order. So left to right is Bastion Nymics, Clockwork City, Coldharbour, etc.
Also, we get 2 books a week for sale in Infinite Archive for 1,000 archival fortunes each. You still need to know the eidetic memory to buy them, but it's a great way to speed up collecting them all.
Any chance for a PC EU house that has this?
I have PC NA and PC EU houses. Just look for "Span's Guild Hall" in Home Tours. (Make sure you aren't under "recommended" houses.) Once at my guild hall, look for the greenhouse. That's the library. Though feel free to use any of the other amenities as well!
Re: Official Discussion Thread for "Tamriel Tomes Season Zero Developer Update"
Tomes as a system is decent at its core. There is some definite things that need to be fixed. To be fair to Zos, it very much appears that they are open to feedback. They are open to fixing the things in their power to fix. We have to keep something in mind. I would be willing to bet that most of the every day development team did not want to include a battle pass in ESO. These aren't decisions made at their level. They just have to execute what the C suite orders. I'm trying to give them some patience and understanding for this.
It's important to keep in mind what a battle pass is. It's a way to keep players busy on content that's already produced, saving money on development costs as well as a way to make money from players paying to get rewards doing old content. They're put in a game because they're proven to work. You can say, I'm not motivated by rewards, but it's proven that a large portion of players will fear missing out on those rewards and pay into the system. That's why I laughed when they said they wanted to eliminate fomo. Now, I'm not saying a battle pass is good or bad, this is just what it's for.
If done in a good way, it can become a great background thing that rewards players for doing tasks and just be an unobtrusive part of the game. We just have to really hope Zos doesn't fall into the trap so many games have, where pretty much all the seasonal content you get is the pass and everything serves as a way to get you into buying it. I don't think we're in danger of that here. It's already made the game world lively. There's people in tons of obscure places, out of the way WBs and public dungeons. As someone that played during the release of TG, DB and Wrothgar, I am overjoyed seeing these awesome zones bustling with people. I can usually make good gold on motifs and stuff from these older zones and that is gone now and that's a good trade. I don't care about pixel fake capitalism.
In the end, what would be the best thing is that tomes fades into the background and is just a thing peppered into our gaming routine. Something that just enhances the flavor and gives us cool stuff while doing it.
There's a few things I think would help but it's just 1 guys opinion. The main thing is the REWARDS. Next seasons are already looking a bit better. But this season really screamed crown store rejects from the back of a drawer that they were certain wouldn't sell. The rewards need to be on point. I also think that all tasks should award the same points, with the chance of rerolling an epic challenge that gives more points and has a harder challenge. This also could act as a gold sink since rerolls will cost gold after your free ones run out. It enhances customization and makes it so folks aren't punished for picking the challenges they want. I also think they should work in some smaller point, no reroll daily challenges for low points for extra flavor. Of course these are just one guys opinions.
It's important to keep in mind what a battle pass is. It's a way to keep players busy on content that's already produced, saving money on development costs as well as a way to make money from players paying to get rewards doing old content. They're put in a game because they're proven to work. You can say, I'm not motivated by rewards, but it's proven that a large portion of players will fear missing out on those rewards and pay into the system. That's why I laughed when they said they wanted to eliminate fomo. Now, I'm not saying a battle pass is good or bad, this is just what it's for.
If done in a good way, it can become a great background thing that rewards players for doing tasks and just be an unobtrusive part of the game. We just have to really hope Zos doesn't fall into the trap so many games have, where pretty much all the seasonal content you get is the pass and everything serves as a way to get you into buying it. I don't think we're in danger of that here. It's already made the game world lively. There's people in tons of obscure places, out of the way WBs and public dungeons. As someone that played during the release of TG, DB and Wrothgar, I am overjoyed seeing these awesome zones bustling with people. I can usually make good gold on motifs and stuff from these older zones and that is gone now and that's a good trade. I don't care about pixel fake capitalism.
In the end, what would be the best thing is that tomes fades into the background and is just a thing peppered into our gaming routine. Something that just enhances the flavor and gives us cool stuff while doing it.
There's a few things I think would help but it's just 1 guys opinion. The main thing is the REWARDS. Next seasons are already looking a bit better. But this season really screamed crown store rejects from the back of a drawer that they were certain wouldn't sell. The rewards need to be on point. I also think that all tasks should award the same points, with the chance of rerolling an epic challenge that gives more points and has a harder challenge. This also could act as a gold sink since rerolls will cost gold after your free ones run out. It enhances customization and makes it so folks aren't punished for picking the challenges they want. I also think they should work in some smaller point, no reroll daily challenges for low points for extra flavor. Of course these are just one guys opinions.
Re: New Base Game Access?
Night Market's accessible to everyone, it doesn't matter if you have an active ESO Plus subscription or have purchased the Premium Tome.
Only the Guilds and Glory DLCs (Imperial City, Orsinium, Thieves Guild & Dark Brotherhood) and Morrowind were fully moved into the Base Game, with Greymoor being moved later in the year. ZOS hasn't announced any plans for the other DLCs to receive the same treatment.
Only the Guilds and Glory DLCs (Imperial City, Orsinium, Thieves Guild & Dark Brotherhood) and Morrowind were fully moved into the Base Game, with Greymoor being moved later in the year. ZOS hasn't announced any plans for the other DLCs to receive the same treatment.
Re: Wisteria's motivation? (Tanlorin's questline, text includes spoilers)
Most people, that I have heard, don't care to actually learn about history, because they find it boring. Which is why they don't bother to actually research it or actually take history lessons in school, which to be fair to a lot of people, history in highschool (at least the US and when I went through school back in the 90s) is often an extremely boring drone of 'so and so did this in the year of XXXX and so and so did that in the year of YYYY' rather than actually learning about history. Basically a list of names and dates. Most people are so put off by that that they don't bother sticking around until college level history classes where you get deeper into the actual history and go beyond the most famous names and dates.
Sadly, most people today, I have found, and this might have always been the case, just you didn't often run into this type, don't actually want to learn, they just want their biases confirmed. This is another aspect to why they want the worlds to conform to 21st century morality, because they don't want to, horror of horrors, potentially find themselves sympathizing with a baddie! (unless that baddie has the acceptible motives for being a baddie). They might find themselves liking a character or race that they absolutely shouldn't like, according to 21st century morals at least. They might actually learn that many things aren't simply black and white, but that there are a lot of pesky shades of gray about these subjects.
Then there is the aspect that people want to use these games as an 'escape' from the 'real world', which I can sympathize with, as I often don't want to read yet another author's diatribe about some character they have deemed the bad person in the story, and that character's motives match 1:1 with whatever real life person or group the author doesn't like.
But, while I will just roll my eyes and move on to the next story or game, many of these people don't want to do that, so instead of moving past it, or focusing on the good parts of the story, they want to change the things they don't like, that prevent them from escaping the real world, so to speak. Which, means making the worlds bland, because any conflict has to either have an absolutely obvious good and bad person, with the good person having no unacceptible flaws, and the bad person having no redeemable qualities (unless we get into villain redemption arcs, those tend to be popular), or has to be so bland, to not accidentally mirror any real world conflicts/issues, past or present.
As I have mentioned, one of the pet sites I play deals with this, where any sort of conflict that can be related to a real world concept needs to be sanitized to make sure that it isn't 'insensitive' to a minority group.
Sadly, most people today, I have found, and this might have always been the case, just you didn't often run into this type, don't actually want to learn, they just want their biases confirmed. This is another aspect to why they want the worlds to conform to 21st century morality, because they don't want to, horror of horrors, potentially find themselves sympathizing with a baddie! (unless that baddie has the acceptible motives for being a baddie). They might find themselves liking a character or race that they absolutely shouldn't like, according to 21st century morals at least. They might actually learn that many things aren't simply black and white, but that there are a lot of pesky shades of gray about these subjects.
Then there is the aspect that people want to use these games as an 'escape' from the 'real world', which I can sympathize with, as I often don't want to read yet another author's diatribe about some character they have deemed the bad person in the story, and that character's motives match 1:1 with whatever real life person or group the author doesn't like.
But, while I will just roll my eyes and move on to the next story or game, many of these people don't want to do that, so instead of moving past it, or focusing on the good parts of the story, they want to change the things they don't like, that prevent them from escaping the real world, so to speak. Which, means making the worlds bland, because any conflict has to either have an absolutely obvious good and bad person, with the good person having no unacceptible flaws, and the bad person having no redeemable qualities (unless we get into villain redemption arcs, those tend to be popular), or has to be so bland, to not accidentally mirror any real world conflicts/issues, past or present.
As I have mentioned, one of the pet sites I play deals with this, where any sort of conflict that can be related to a real world concept needs to be sanitized to make sure that it isn't 'insensitive' to a minority group.
