[GIANT "wall of text"] Attorneyatlawl's 1.6 feedback megapost.

ThatNeonZebraAgain

Denidil wrote: »

That's a bug!

Paging @ZOS_GinaBruno and @ZOS_ShannonM

Is the bug that they're not stacking, or that the buffs from using a potion aren't showing up in the stat screen?

Either way, I'm still skeptical that potions are indeed supposed to stack with ability buffs of the same type.

Here is what the 1.6.3 note said:

Fixed an issue where potion buffs were not being applied when you had an ability active that applied the same buff.

Here is a note from 1.6.1 that really complicates things (emphasis added):

Fixed an issue that prevented drinking a potion if you already had the same buff or effect that the potion would provide. Now, you will drink the potion and receive any benefit from it that your character doesn’t already have. Drinking a potion will also refresh the same type of buff or effect if the remaining duration is shorter than what the potion will apply.

So according to this prior patch, when drinking a potion you're supposed to gain effects you don't already have, and if you already have an effect, it's supposed to refresh it. In this light, the note form 1.6.3 does not seem to suggest the buffs should stack, but rather that the buff wasn't refreshing properly. If two Major buffs just stacked with one another, that would very over-powered, which is why I suggested a smart scaling system for stacking potion and Major/Minor buff effects. So again, this issue is not resolved, and my critiques and ideas about the changes to potion usage still stand.

Armitas

To add to your post about glyphs.

Reduce feat cost glyphs will reduce roll cost but not block cost which really sux. I have not tested break free.
The CP "reduce stamina cost" is true to it's name and only reduces skills and abilities, not block or roll, which is really disappointed considering how crummy the tumble reduction is. 10 points was 152 stamina reduction for break/roll for me.

All in all I feel like we were nerfed to V1 and given enough CP to get to V4, assuming 23/23/23 will be what we get on live.

DDuke

wraith808 wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

wraith808 wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

wraith808 wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

• When killed, heal Allies within 8m by X
• 50% reduced Gathering times
• Better items from Treasure Chests
• 15% chance to return X damage to attacker when blocking a melee attack, 5 second cooldown

These are point in time single time benefits. Thus they are not valid to include in a linear progression discussion. In essence you are basing the bulk of your argument around a single data point, and then couching it as if it is a generic point on the graph. If you take the same discussion of two points in time that didn't bisect that particular data point, you'd get a more relevant argument- and one that would disprove your imbalance statement.

I am simply comparing the difference of 500 & 750 CPs based on how I would spend them as a stamina player.
What you just quoted are far from being the "bulk of my argument".


This is the bulk of my argument:
-5.3% Stamina Costs Spells/Abilities - almost equal to a 5-set bonus
+4.5% Stamina Regeneration - huge, and compounds with other % increases
+5.1% more Healing Reduction
+5.8% Light/Heavy Attack Damage
+9% Physical Critical Strike damage - this alone is 5% DPS boost
+5.9% Armour Penetration
+1.2% Spell Resistance
-6.9% DoT damage taken
-5% Poison/Disease/Magic damage taken
-5% Flame/Frost/Shock damage taken.

The reason that it is the bulk of the argument is the fact that the other gains are (somewhat) linear based on a (somewhat)linear gain, i.e. just taking your first point:

-5.3% Stamina Costs Spells/Abilities - almost equal to a 5-set bonus

The other player at a 33% less advancement rate gets... 33% less, i.e. from your own post:

-10.5% Stamina Costs Spells/Abilities

The only things that do not fall into that categories are the triggered events.

The point was to illustrate that the difference 250 Champion points can make is significant, even if it's "only 33% more than 500CPs", what some people are claiming is not the case.

500CP vs 750CP. In current game it'd more or less be like a VR2 fighting a VR14 charater. We all know how that ends.


Note: I'm not against end game character progression, even if that granted big advantages. I'm against tying it into a time and/or $$$ based grind (as opposed to skill based one, e.g. difficult raids & PvP arena leaderboards).

But... it is a 33% difference approximately. The 750 would have a total of -15.8% stamina reduction, and the 500 would have a -10.5% stamina reduction. Not exactly 33%, but close enough for government work.

Roughly the same difference as between ungeared VR1 character & geared VR14 character. 5-10% difference in dmg taken, dmg done, ability costs etc might not seem like much, but they make a huge difference.

When was the last time (assuming you're VR14) you lost against a VR1?

wraith808 wrote: »

And it's not a time based grind... it's an XP based grind, right? So if you do more difficult content, you should get correspondingly more XP, right?

That still makes it a time based grind, as there are no caps on XP (or CP) earned per day/week.

It doesn't really matter what content you do, as long as the ones who spend most time doing it become demigods & the ones with limited amount of time (but enough skill to clear it) will become second grade citizens.

That said, from what I've seen the XP gain from SO & other Trials is actually pretty much the worst out there, so it's not like difficult content=more XP.

I know multiple competitive, skilled & dedicated people who log in for a couple of hours every day, and it makes me sad that those players will probably quit when they realize they can no longer PvE or PvP effectively, because they get beaten by scrubs that farm Spellscar (or any other FOTM grind spot) 24/7.


How to fix this: add a relatively low cap on Champion Points (reachable in a month~ or so), which would turn the system into a horizontal one akin to talent trees from other games, allowing you to specialize your character & separate it from the rest.

rhubbert_ESO

So is it smarter to spend 120 in one particular tree and unlock an important passive or spread them all around?

Valen_Byte

Denidil wrote: »

So, the smartest thing to do may be to put 30 points into each category first?

Sotha_Sil

Read the OP and the posts after it. My faith in people caring about the game is restored ! I hope ZoS look at this. Sorry for the completely unrelated post.

starkerealm

rhubbert_ESO wrote: »

So is it smarter to spend 120 in one particular tree and unlock an important passive or spread them all around?

It seems the smartest choice, at the moment, is to spend 30 in each star for the 120. Obviously, if one of the stars is going to be of no use to you, then you're probably going to want to skip that and distribute your points across the other stars in that constellation.

Denidil

Valen_Byte wrote: »

Denidil wrote: »

So, the smartest thing to do may be to put 30 points into each category first?

that is what i was thinking

wraith808

DDuke wrote: »

Roughly the same difference as between ungeared VR1 character & geared VR14 character. 5-10% difference in dmg taken, dmg done, ability costs etc might not seem like much, but they make a huge difference.

When was the last time (assuming you're VR14) you lost against a VR1?

You shouldn't. And we're talking about more than the difference between a VR14 and a VR1 given the value that they've placed on the CPs (we don't know the final values, but it does give an indication).

500 vs 750 is apparently a *lot* of CPs, given that for a max level VR14 they're only giving us 70. It would seem more of a comparison to do 0 vs 70, or 70 vs some other multiple. As you said, when is the last time a VR14 lost vs a VR1. So a 70 vs 0 is VR14 vs VR1. 500 vs 750 is a gross inflation of that difference.

DDuke wrote: »

wraith808 wrote: »

And it's not a time based grind... it's an XP based grind, right? So if you do more difficult content, you should get correspondingly more XP, right?

That still makes it a time based grind, as there are no caps on XP (or CP) earned per day/week.

It doesn't really matter what content you do, as long as the ones who spend most time doing it become demigods & the ones with limited amount of time (but enough skill to clear it) will become second grade citizens.

That said, from what I've seen the XP gain from SO & other Trials is actually pretty much the worst out there, so it's not like difficult content=more XP.

I know multiple competitive, skilled & dedicated people who log in for a couple of hours every day, and it makes me sad that those players will probably quit when they realize they can no longer PvE or PvP effectively, because they get beaten by scrubs that farm Spellscar (or any other FOTM grind spot) 24/7.


How to fix this: add a relatively low cap on Champion Points (reachable in a month~ or so), which would turn the system into a horizontal one akin to talent trees from other games, allowing you to specialize your character & separate it from the rest.

If the problem is in the XP gain, then the XP gain should be addressed. Content can be addressed with Dailies. But caps? Just like with Softcaps, I totally disagree with them. And I'm still not totally convinced because of the numbers that you're using that this is even enough of a problem to put any sort of drastic change in to address this. Even your caps doesn't address someone coming in a year after someone else. And I don't think that *should* be addressed.

DDuke

wraith808 wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

wraith808 wrote: »

And it's not a time based grind... it's an XP based grind, right? So if you do more difficult content, you should get correspondingly more XP, right?

That still makes it a time based grind, as there are no caps on XP (or CP) earned per day/week.

It doesn't really matter what content you do, as long as the ones who spend most time doing it become demigods & the ones with limited amount of time (but enough skill to clear it) will become second grade citizens.

That said, from what I've seen the XP gain from SO & other Trials is actually pretty much the worst out there, so it's not like difficult content=more XP.

I know multiple competitive, skilled & dedicated people who log in for a couple of hours every day, and it makes me sad that those players will probably quit when they realize they can no longer PvE or PvP effectively, because they get beaten by scrubs that farm Spellscar (or any other FOTM grind spot) 24/7.


How to fix this: add a relatively low cap on Champion Points (reachable in a month~ or so), which would turn the system into a horizontal one akin to talent trees from other games, allowing you to specialize your character & separate it from the rest.

If the problem is in the XP gain, then the XP gain should be addressed. Content can be addressed with Dailies. But caps? Just like with Softcaps, I totally disagree with them. And I'm still not totally convinced because of the numbers that you're using that this is even enough of a problem to put any sort of drastic change in to address this. Even your caps doesn't address someone coming in a year after someone else. And I don't think that *should* be addressed.

Well, the problem isn't exactly XP gain either (although it is related to it).

The problem is at the core of the system's idea. It is rewarding those who spend the most time (or money) in the game, instead of those who are the most skilled at it.

They have intentionally made it a huge, time-consuming grind, so we'd feel the need to purchase our character progression via Crown Store XP boosters and/or keep playing as much as possible in order to stay competitive. A hook, if you will.

I'm fine with a game having hooks, but I'd much rather have them be gear from difficult content, than some numbers behind my character that I have to spend 12 hours a day grinding the same content over & over again.

Also, I very much doubt the stated aim of this system will be fulfilled ("providing more character customization options"), if everyone (who survives the grind) is going to end up with the same passives anyhow.