Feedback to the Champion System

fromtesonlineb16_ESO

If Hodor are having problems then God help the normal players .. and that's not a 'dig' at you guys.

Given you guild's obvious levels of skill, this I think is the most damming comment I've seen from the players is response to ZOS changes, I can only hope they listen to you, they've clearly ignored everyone else so far.

I agree, it seems to be PVE is becoming the collateral damage is ZOS vain attempts to pander to endless PVP QQ (as happens in all MMOs which try to mix PVE and PVP) .. the irony of course is they'll never satisfy many PVPers who always have tunnel vision and expect their own class to be viable 1 v 1.

henryabelarwb17_ESO

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

If Hodor are having problems then God help the normal players .. and that's not a 'dig' at you guys.

Given you guild's obvious levels of skill, this I think is the most damming comment I've seen from the players is response to ZOS changes, I can only hope they listen to you, they've clearly ignored everyone else so far.

I agree, it seems to be PVE is becoming the collateral damage is ZOS vain attempts to pander to endless PVP QQ (as happens in all MMOs which try to mix PVE and PVP) .. the irony of course is they'll never satisfy many PVPers who always have tunnel vision and expect their own class to be viable 1 v 1.

I am not part of Hodor, but groups had many of its members and there was also xmovingtarget... of course part of the fault is due to negate not working on boss and resorting to old school mechanic but still dps was so bad

henryabelarwb17_ESO

XiLxBULLETx wrote: »

henryabelarwb17_ESO wrote: »

I won't even comment on the nerfs to Negate other then to say, is there even a point to bring a Sorcerer into raid now? Seems I will have to ubber powerlevel a DK to be allowed in raids during 1.6.

XiLxBULLETx wrote: »

henryabelarwb17_ESO wrote: »

Way to go... nerfing magica builds by 50%!!!! what are you thinking? DK mag build has become obsolete and now I will be forced to have a stamina build... so much for play what role you want!!!!

Got emperor kill achievement on my v3 magica build dk last night on chill rendered... My main is template v8 never got that achievement... My v3 dk is overpowered... One on one mostly v14 non dks can't handle him.

Emperor kill 1 vs 1? then if that was the case u fought a lame emperor... if u were in a zerg it doesn't count.... and if u believe a v3 DK is overpowered tell me what u havin... as I want some too :P

I wouldn't call a 4 man group a zerg but.... The funnier part of this is that you think skirt and stick build dks aren't op... But I digress... [/quote]

Enlighten me pls... how does using elemental drain and crushing shock better on dk then on sorc or nb? only dark elfs have the 7% flame dmg passive (and they can be any class using flame destro)... the funny part is that u think that because u had an emperor kill u are op... U get that achievement even by standing next to a group and not dpsing at all... As long as they kill him and perhaps u hit him one or two times.... come do a trial... lets see how op you are

Ysne58

The more I think about this, the more I think that letting people start earning cps at level 1 is the only way to keep the gap that will be there from getting bigger. While it is not as vertical as the leveling system in the game this is still a vertical system.

Giraffon

"When you earn a Champion Point, that point will be assigned to the Warrior, the Thief, or the Mage, in that order. Once you earn a point in the Thief, for instance, your next point will be assigned to the Mage, and the next after that to the Warrior. You choose which of the three constellations under that sign to spend your point on."

WHY? WHY? WHY? (cry, cry, cry)

Why can't we put our Champion points where we want? Why does every player have to be a "jack of all trades"? It doesn't make sense!

...stomps off. [tantrum over]

Enodoc

Balance. Also, it's really not that bad. The problem they have is of their own making, as they really should have called them Defence Points, Utility Points and Offence Points from the start, then people wouldn't even think of putting them "where we want" because they don't sound interchangeable.

EQBallzz

That's not how it works anyway. Yes, you are forced into the three different signs in a rotation but they have stated there will be options in each of the three for all play styles (tanking, dps, healing). You just won't be able to front load everything into one specifically and will have to diversify a bit. Armor and health and blocking on a rotation instead of dumping everything into health (or whatever..that is just an example pulled from thin air).

Kragorn

Enodoc wrote: »

Balance

Because homogeneity is a Good Thing?

On that basis we would also be forced to put Attribute Points into ALL THREE stats, but we're not, so there's no good reason for dictating to us how we spend CPs, is there?

Enodoc

Kragorn wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Balance

Because homogeneity is a Good Thing?

On that basis we would also be forced to put Attribute Points into ALL THREE stats, but we're not, so there's no good reason for dictating to us how we spend CPs, is there?

Enodoc wrote: »

[If they had] called them Defence Points, Utility Points and Offence Points from the start, then people wouldn't even think [they were being dictated to] because they don't sound interchangeable.

Kragorn

I don't think you know what homogeneity means, your quote there has no relation to what I wrote.

By dictating to players where they can spend the points by forcing us to place them in each group ZOS ensure everyone spends them the same way and end up with the same profile ... ergo homogeneous ... I also pointed out such forced point placing doesn't occur with Attribute Points.

I have no idea why you quoted what you said before, apart from clearly trying to make me look an idiot, but whatever you think you proved it was nothing related to what I said.

EQBallzz

Kragorn wrote: »

I don't think you know what homogeneity means, your quote there has no relation to what I wrote.

By dictating to players where they can spend the points by forcing us to place them in each group ZOS ensure everyone spends them the same way and end up with the same profile ... ergo homogeneous ... I also pointed out such forced point placing doesn't occur with Attribute Points.

I have no idea why you quoted what you said before, apart from clearly trying to make me look an idiot, but whatever you think you proved it was nothing related to what I said.

People won't end up with the same profile because there are things for each playstyle in each of the signs so depending on your focus you may choose DPS options in all three while someone else chooses healing options in all three and yet someone else will choose a mixture in all three. They clearly didn't want people to just put everything into health or stamina or armor and overload one particular stat with the soft caps being removed (I guess).

Honestly, I don't see why they care because anyone who does that will be severely lacking in other areas and with diminishing returns it will quickly become ineffective to keep dumping into the same thing over and over.

DanielMaxwell

EQBallzz wrote: »

Kragorn wrote: »

I don't think you know what homogeneity means, your quote there has no relation to what I wrote.

By dictating to players where they can spend the points by forcing us to place them in each group ZOS ensure everyone spends them the same way and end up with the same profile ... ergo homogeneous ... I also pointed out such forced point placing doesn't occur with Attribute Points.

I have no idea why you quoted what you said before, apart from clearly trying to make me look an idiot, but whatever you think you proved it was nothing related to what I said.

People won't end up with the same profile because there are things for each playstyle in each of the signs so depending on your focus you may choose DPS options in all three while someone else chooses healing options in all three and yet someone else will choose a mixture in all three. They clearly didn't want people to just put everything into health or stamina or armor and overload one particular stat with the soft caps being removed (I guess).

Honestly, I don't see why they care because anyone who does that will be severely lacking in other areas and with diminishing returns it will quickly become ineffective to keep dumping into the same thing over and over.

I suspect that the first 270 points for most will be spent on unlocking the first 2 passive unlocks in each of the champion system trees , after that they will focus more of their champion system points on their preferred roles . Spending your points this way allows you to increase your survival(tanking) , healing (received and done) , and damage out put . by getting these you make your character more useful to your raid group , general game play (open world and dungeons) , and in PvP.

With the way the system forces you to rotate through the three constellations for where your points are earned (i.e. earn one in warrior , next one is earned in mage , then your third is earned in the thief , the fourth would be back to warrior starting the cycle over ) it encourages spending your points in the manner I alluded to . You would obviously start with the passives for your preferred role then work on the unlocks for the other roles before returning to your preferred role as at that point you would be dealing with the most sever of the diminishing returns .

EQBallzz

DanielMaxwell wrote: »

EQBallzz wrote: »

Kragorn wrote: »

I don't think you know what homogeneity means, your quote there has no relation to what I wrote.

By dictating to players where they can spend the points by forcing us to place them in each group ZOS ensure everyone spends them the same way and end up with the same profile ... ergo homogeneous ... I also pointed out such forced point placing doesn't occur with Attribute Points.

I have no idea why you quoted what you said before, apart from clearly trying to make me look an idiot, but whatever you think you proved it was nothing related to what I said.

People won't end up with the same profile because there are things for each playstyle in each of the signs so depending on your focus you may choose DPS options in all three while someone else chooses healing options in all three and yet someone else will choose a mixture in all three. They clearly didn't want people to just put everything into health or stamina or armor and overload one particular stat with the soft caps being removed (I guess).

Honestly, I don't see why they care because anyone who does that will be severely lacking in other areas and with diminishing returns it will quickly become ineffective to keep dumping into the same thing over and over.

I suspect that the first 270 points for most will be spent on unlocking the first 2 passive unlocks in each of the champion system trees , after that they will focus more of their champion system points on their preferred roles . Spending your points this way allows you to increase your survival(tanking) , healing (received and done) , and damage out put . by getting these you make your character more useful to your raid group , general game play (open world and dungeons) , and in PvP.

With the way the system forces you to rotate through the three constellations for where your points are earned (i.e. earn one in warrior , next one is earned in mage , then your third is earned in the thief , the fourth would be back to warrior starting the cycle over ) it encourages spending your points in the manner I alluded to . You would obviously start with the passives for your preferred role then work on the unlocks for the other roles before returning to your preferred role as at that point you would be dealing with the most sever of the diminishing returns .

Again, they have explained that warrior is not only tanking perks and mage is not just caster/healer perks. They said if you want to focus on tank only perks you can find tank specific type perks in warrior, mage and thief (though I suspect some will be better than others obviously). Same goes for caster or thief. I'm not testing on the PTS though so I can't say to what degree that is true. Can anyone confirm how valid it is to focus on one role in all 3 trees?

DanielMaxwell

EQBallzz wrote: »

DanielMaxwell wrote: »

EQBallzz wrote: »

Kragorn wrote: »

I don't think you know what homogeneity means, your quote there has no relation to what I wrote.

By dictating to players where they can spend the points by forcing us to place them in each group ZOS ensure everyone spends them the same way and end up with the same profile ... ergo homogeneous ... I also pointed out such forced point placing doesn't occur with Attribute Points.

I have no idea why you quoted what you said before, apart from clearly trying to make me look an idiot, but whatever you think you proved it was nothing related to what I said.

People won't end up with the same profile because there are things for each playstyle in each of the signs so depending on your focus you may choose DPS options in all three while someone else chooses healing options in all three and yet someone else will choose a mixture in all three. They clearly didn't want people to just put everything into health or stamina or armor and overload one particular stat with the soft caps being removed (I guess).

Honestly, I don't see why they care because anyone who does that will be severely lacking in other areas and with diminishing returns it will quickly become ineffective to keep dumping into the same thing over and over.

I suspect that the first 270 points for most will be spent on unlocking the first 2 passive unlocks in each of the champion system trees , after that they will focus more of their champion system points on their preferred roles . Spending your points this way allows you to increase your survival(tanking) , healing (received and done) , and damage out put . by getting these you make your character more useful to your raid group , general game play (open world and dungeons) , and in PvP.

With the way the system forces you to rotate through the three constellations for where your points are earned (i.e. earn one in warrior , next one is earned in mage , then your third is earned in the thief , the fourth would be back to warrior starting the cycle over ) it encourages spending your points in the manner I alluded to . You would obviously start with the passives for your preferred role then work on the unlocks for the other roles before returning to your preferred role as at that point you would be dealing with the most sever of the diminishing returns .

Again, they have explained that warrior is not only tanking perks and mage is not just caster/healer perks. They said if you want to focus on tank only perks you can find tank specific type perks in warrior, mage and thief (though I suspect some will be better than others obviously). Same goes for caster or thief. I'm not testing on the PTS though so I can't say to what degree that is true. Can anyone confirm how valid it is to focus on one role in all 3 trees?

Each constellation has three trees if you do the math it will take 270 points to unlock the first two passives in each tree , not in each constellation (warrior , mage , thief are the constellation's) .

Your going to focus on your preferred role to get the first two passive unlocks in each constellation , then get the first two passive unlocks from the other trees as you will get the best return from your points there . After you have those 18 passives unlocked you would return focus to get the last six passives for your preferred role from each constellation , then work on the fluff or remaining passives for the other roles that add flexibility to your character.

Enodoc

Kragorn wrote: »

I don't think you know what homogeneity means, your quote there has no relation to what I wrote.

By dictating to players where they can spend the points by forcing us to place them in each group ZOS ensure everyone spends them the same way and end up with the same profile ... ergo homogeneous ... I also pointed out such forced point placing doesn't occur with Attribute Points.

I have no idea why you quoted what you said before, apart from clearly trying to make me look an idiot, but whatever you think you proved it was nothing related to what I said.

I do know what homogeneity means. My mistake was quoting the whole thing when I only really should have quoted there's no good reason for dictating to us how we spend CPs, as that was what I was responding to. My point being, that if they had named them three different things, and not bundled them into the single name "Champion Points", people would not be complaining about having their "CP spending" dictated, because there would be no reason to suppose that points named as Offence Points, Utility Points and Defence Points were interchangeable.

Gyudan

HyperToxic wrote: »

TOP 10 reasons why update 6 is a step in the wrong direction.

#1 None of the top guilds are able to complete the first boss in SO – perhaps everyone needs to relearn all the fights – but for what? - Gear that is no longer useful because it gives so little Spell Damage / Weapon Damage compared to other 2 piece sets? In fact everyone feels so nerfed because they are wiping in AA and Hel Ra. Perhaps end gamers need to grind 600 Champion Points to be useful again.
-
#2 Nobody is going to be invited to Trial raids unless they spend countless hours grinding Champion Points. Champion Points take forever to get (400,000 XP). Perhaps it will take me a year of grinding to get back to my current “live” power level.

#3 Spell Resist scales with Armor. How does this make any since, how does a piece of metal protect from fire or lighting. How does a piece of leather protect from magic? In most RPGs casters spend their life learning magic and knows how defend against it. Melee should be strong against a caster – and a caster should be strong against Armor. But not now…. Caster in PvP are going to be glass cannons and only against themselves lol. Very bad move IMO.

#4 All Trial gear is no longer desirable – Crit has been cut in half. It has been confirmed that stacking sets with Spell Damage and Weapon Damage is the best way to go. Think sets like Adroitness / Cyrodill’s Light / Worm’s Raiment / Burning Spell Weave / Martial Knowledge / Syrabane and the only crafted set Torug’s Pact; considering soft caps have been removed. It would have been better if you just removed the Crit on these sets and replaced it with Spell Damage / Weapon Damage as appropriate.

#5 The lowest AOE DPS class in the game (Sorcs) is still going to be the lowest AOE DPS. Now with less heals and less of an ultimate (if you even want to call it that now). As it is now only 1 Sorc is permeated in top guild trial runs, with few exceptions… IMO this will not change.

#6 the Nighblade Magicka build’s single target ability funnel health got nerfed. And was given the same buff as Sorcs through Structured Entropy.

#7 DKs Magicka build’s main dps ability was replaced with a stamina version but will still remain as the highest AOE dps class in the game – And will now get two sources of Crit (Inner Light and Sea of Flames) that apparently stack + 10% each… And was also given the same buff as Sorcs through Structured Entropy.

#8 Still waiting since release for some form of team PvP and Dualing. No everyone loves AvA…

#9 I would have thought by now that quests would have given meaningful rewards. Like awesome items that you would like to keep and remain useful – like most other MMORPGs

#10 The community is going to go way downhill with B2P…

1. Wrong, SO is actually easier than before. More info here.
2. Everything is completeable with 70 CPs, so I don't foresee that anytime soon. Of course if you already can't find anyone to carry you through trials, 1.6 won't make you more attractive.
3. I agree that light armor should provide better spell resistance. It seems a bit too weak at the moment.
4. True. Crit rating needs to change for another bonus (spell/weapon dmg, increased elemental dmg, amor/spell pen, increase dmg on light/heavy attacks, ...). Take your pick.
5. This needs further testing but I think that you are mostly wrong. Lightning flood and lightning form seem good for AOE damage, in addition to daedric curse.
6. Entropy needs to change. It's currently much stronger than Surge for no reason. The Major buff needs to become a minor one.
7. DKs seem to have been brought back to a more normal DPS efficiency. I think that the changes were pretty good.
8. Waiting too, same as housing, spellcrafting, barbershop and new content.
9. Maybe. I stopped caring after the 2nd Cadwell Gold completion.
10. Maybe, maybe not. The P2P community isn't perfect either.


I created a feedback thread on the champion system here.

Kragorn

HyperToxic wrote: »

#9 I would have thought by now that quests would have given meaningful rewards. Like awesome items that you would like to keep and remain useful – like most other MMORPGs

Which 'most other MMOs' give BiS or even approaching BiS for quests?

Of the games I play at the moment (FFXI, FFXIV, Rift, LoTRO, WOW, GW2, ESO) I can't think of a single one where that applies, they ALL reserve BiS for instanced content, usually raids but at least groups, none of those games have quests that I recall whose rewards are anything better than functional and certainly inferior to even crafted gear.

HyperToxic

Kragorn wrote: »

HyperToxic wrote: »

#9 I would have thought by now that quests would have given meaningful rewards. Like awesome items that you would like to keep and remain useful – like most other MMORPGs

Which 'most other MMOs' give BiS or even approaching BiS for quests?

Of the games I play at the moment (FFXI, FFXIV, Rift, LoTRO, WOW, GW2, ESO) I can't think of a single one where that applies, they ALL reserve BiS for instanced content, usually raids but at least groups, none of those games have quests that I recall whose rewards are anything better than functional and certainly inferior to even crafted gear.

I was thinking Wow here. I remember questing way back when in vanilla wow - I received items from quest items that gave stats which were nearly always better than what I had equipped - this propelled me to do quest. Also wow quest gave items like Trinkets - remember the "Carrot on a Stick?"

Wow was not the only game that made me feel like questing was meaningful.

I have 4 vet toons and have completed all the content in ESO. Not a single quest made me feel like I was progressing.

EQBallzz

HyperToxic wrote: »

Kragorn wrote: »

HyperToxic wrote: »

#9 I would have thought by now that quests would have given meaningful rewards. Like awesome items that you would like to keep and remain useful – like most other MMORPGs

Which 'most other MMOs' give BiS or even approaching BiS for quests?

Of the games I play at the moment (FFXI, FFXIV, Rift, LoTRO, WOW, GW2, ESO) I can't think of a single one where that applies, they ALL reserve BiS for instanced content, usually raids but at least groups, none of those games have quests that I recall whose rewards are anything better than functional and certainly inferior to even crafted gear.

I was thinking Wow here. I remember questing way back when in vanilla wow - I received items from quest items that gave stats which were nearly always better than what I had equipped - this propelled me to do quest. Also wow quest gave items like Trinkets - remember the "Carrot on a Stick?"

Wow was not the only game that made me feel like questing was meaningful.

I have 4 vet toons and have completed all the content in ESO. Not a single quest made me feel like I was progressing.

^^agree with that. Don't know why ESO quest rewards are so bland and worthless. Don't worry, though. Mudcrab on a stick for 4.99 soon in the cash shop.

Kragorn

HyperToxic wrote: »

Kragorn wrote: »

HyperToxic wrote: »

#9 I would have thought by now that quests would have given meaningful rewards. Like awesome items that you would like to keep and remain useful – like most other MMORPGs

Which 'most other MMOs' give BiS or even approaching BiS for quests?

Of the games I play at the moment (FFXI, FFXIV, Rift, LoTRO, WOW, GW2, ESO) I can't think of a single one where that applies, they ALL reserve BiS for instanced content, usually raids but at least groups, none of those games have quests that I recall whose rewards are anything better than functional and certainly inferior to even crafted gear.

I was thinking Wow here. I remember questing way back when in vanilla wow - I received items from quest items that gave stats which were nearly always better than what I had equipped - this propelled me to do quest. Also wow quest gave items like Trinkets - remember the "Carrot on a Stick?"

Ah, okay my apoligies, I misunderstood what you were getting at by "remain useful", I thought you meant 'useful' as in gear that is better than I get doing other content, hence my reference to 'BiS' items.

In that case I would agree with what you said, toys like Carrot on a Stick were certainly fun to get and their bonuses were useful but not 'winning' as such so didn't generate much QQ.

Greagor

Critical chance... why i need to grind so many points to get there?
Doesnt feel nice

Kama_Son_Of_Dharma

Hmmmm, a question about this change.

If one player got 3 VR14 Chars He will only get 70 CP

Another player got 1 vr2, 1 vr5 and 1 vr7
So (vr2*5=10) + (vr5*5=25) + (vr7*5=35) = 70 CP

Is this correct?

Ysne58

I still think that you need to have people earning cp from the beginning to keep the gap from getting too large.

phreatophile

Feedback to Champion System: it sure is shiny, way too many nerfs. Nerfs to HP, MP, SP all hidden by the bigger numbers. Nerfs to abilities and resistances, especially racial passives.

I get that "some power had to be reserved for the champion system" but the nerf to our characters is obvious and far from what was represented to us early on.

Kragorn

Kama_Son_Of_Dharma wrote: »

Hmmmm, a question about this change.

If one player got 3 VR14 Chars He will only get 70 CP

Another player got 1 vr2, 1 vr5 and 1 vr7
So (vr2*5=10) + (vr5*5=25) + (vr7*5=35) = 70 CP

Is this correct?

Yes.

Kragorn

Ysne58 wrote: »

I still think that you need to have people earning cp from the beginning to keep the gap from getting too large.

I agree, even with the cap of 70 CPs no matter how many VR14s someone has the gap is still going to be PERCEIVED as an unbridgeable gulf for new players.

The point here is that even though DR kicks in and the effective difference between a new 50 with 0 CPs and one with 70 CPs may be not huge .. let's not even consider the case where the ex-VR14 has been acquiring 3 or 4 CPs a day (as seems many on the PTS were getting very conservatively) while the new 50 was leveling (and no, a new player doesn't get to 50 in 2 or 3 days as some of the 'vets' keep prattling on about) .. the current VR14s who are screaming about the 'unfairness of it' have created a climate where the PERCEPTION is that a new 50 will then need to grind for weeks and months to get their CPs up to a point where the 'vets' will allow them to play.

ZOS are pandering to this by their comments which effectively will bring Gearscore to this game .. no, it's not identical to measuring ILevel but it's entirely analogous .. it's likely to get ugly it seems to me.

HyperToxic

Major Prophecy from Sea of Flames and Inner light stacks together and provides 10% Spell Critical from each source for a total of 20% additional Spell Critical. However Spell Power pots with Spell Critical provides the same Major Prophecy buff yet does not stack with either.

I’ve herd rumors that this is a bug, I’ve also herd that it is intended that any Major buff stacked with another Major buff with the same name is automatically converted to a Minor buff. If that is the case why not with Spell Power pots?

Can anyone shed light on this?

Kama_Son_Of_Dharma

Kragorn wrote: »

Kama_Son_Of_Dharma wrote: »

Hmmmm, a question about this change.

If one player got 3 VR14 Chars He will only get 70 CP

Another player got 1 vr2, 1 vr5 and 1 vr7
So (vr2*5=10) + (vr5*5=25) + (vr7*5=35) = 70 CP

Is this correct?

Yes.

In that case i think this change suck!

Kat_Cnaa

EQBallzz wrote: »

HyperToxic wrote: »

Kragorn wrote: »

HyperToxic wrote: »

#9 I would have thought by now that quests would have given meaningful rewards. Like awesome items that you would like to keep and remain useful – like most other MMORPGs

Which 'most other MMOs' give BiS or even approaching BiS for quests?

Of the games I play at the moment (FFXI, FFXIV, Rift, LoTRO, WOW, GW2, ESO) I can't think of a single one where that applies, they ALL reserve BiS for instanced content, usually raids but at least groups, none of those games have quests that I recall whose rewards are anything better than functional and certainly inferior to even crafted gear.

I was thinking Wow here. I remember questing way back when in vanilla wow - I received items from quest items that gave stats which were nearly always better than what I had equipped - this propelled me to do quest. Also wow quest gave items like Trinkets - remember the "Carrot on a Stick?"

Wow was not the only game that made me feel like questing was meaningful.

I have 4 vet toons and have completed all the content in ESO. Not a single quest made me feel like I was progressing.

^^agree with that. Don't know why ESO quest rewards are so bland and worthless. Don't worry, though. Mudcrab on a stick for 4.99 soon in the cash shop.

I would enjoy getting some of the same things as quest rewards as I get from hirelings (mats). I break down the uniquely named but generally generic quest reward items to get one hemming/honing stone/pitch. Either that, or more gold.

As it stands, though, I enjoy questing because I enjoy the lore and I feel like I'm progressing because of the XP I'm gaining.

Kragorn

Kama_Son_Of_Dharma wrote: »

Kragorn wrote: »

Kama_Son_Of_Dharma wrote: »

Hmmmm, a question about this change.

If one player got 3 VR14 Chars He will only get 70 CP

Another player got 1 vr2, 1 vr5 and 1 vr7
So (vr2*5=10) + (vr5*5=25) + (vr7*5=35) = 70 CP

Is this correct?

Yes.

In that case i think this change suck!

ZOS created a rod for their own backs when they promised people's XP would be tracked and gave the clear impression that all XP gained would translated into CP, some months later and without any hint given to the players who took them at their word, they came here and announced they weren't going to fulfill that promise.

Their reasoning is sound and their first plan of giving everyone 30 CPs was probably best for the game long-term but the outcry meant they watered the plan down and IMO now have created almost the bad situation they stated their U-turn was intended to avoid: a vast gulf between the 'vets' who who have started with scores of CPs and the 'newbs' who didn't have a single CP.

I agree for players with multiple VR14s it sucks, but ZOS should have seen it coming BEFORE they made their announcement to abandon VRs .. which of course was a result of their implementing VRs (a 'vision' as they called it) and large numbers of players rejecting it: seems to me in their haste to make changes to stem a tide of players leaving the game they didn't think it through.