Why raising the VR cap if they plan to remove it?

Wakkoo

I dont understand this. If ZOS plan to get rid of VR ranks, why do they raise the cap for it instead of working on with a better replacement feature/system? They are supporting a system they plan to remove? Its like saying "We're going to remove leveling in the game. But in the meanwhile we'll raise the level cap by 20 levels! Enjoy."

Can someone explain what is going on here? I just dont get the logic

Vis

Wakkoo wrote: »

I dont understand this. If ZOS plan to get rid of VR ranks...

Can someone explain what is going on here?

Leandor

My crystal ball tells me it is because the veteran ranks will not go away as in "deleted" but they will be converted to normal levels. It just looks stupid to have level 63 as max rank, which would be the case if you convert from veteran rank 14. Level 65 as max rank looks much more conventional. So, add two veteran ranks, then convert.

I would also hazard the guess that they decided to take this route because the existing itemisation scheme cannot in any feasible way be converted to "all players are now 50". So instead of having another endless complain storm because of all the gold tempers used in player's equipment and the additional 13 skill-/attribute points, they just do the conventional way.

The stuff that comes out in future will probably be season based (they have already said so), meaning that it will become available to all players at max. level at the same time, no matter how much playtime, and be only resource limited (as in "you need to have enough AP to buy the new stuff" OR "you have to be in a raid guild to beat the new encounters"), essentially the concept used everywhere else with the exception of no level increases. You are still... penetrated... if you don't get the new stuff, but at least you don't have to get it because your level increased. Sugarcoated refuse.

Do me a favour, though. There are enough complaint discussions going on in regards to the upcoming changes. Frankly speaking, it gets boring really fast. Let's not make another one.

RavenSkylord

Despite the number of similar threads posted and dying because of forementioned attitude, there has not been a real explanation given. As such it leads to a lot of speculation and of course players wondering about. My best guess would be that with content on the horizon to be released, and of course players at max simply have to have something to work towards. Changingnthe system likely is not ready to be implemented and so the increase is being placed as a stop gap. Becausr if new content gets released and maxed players have nothing to strive for, then these forums would become filled with outcrys that it is all pointless to them.

And to recycle previous poster comment. THAT would get boring really fast

TequilaFire

The Endless Enigma.
/sigh

Enodoc

Eric answered this quite well on ESO Live, but the reason is essentially due to itemization. In order to have some "new, better gear" with the next content update, there needs to be a VR rank increase to go with it so that it is balanced properly. When VRs are removed (and Eric hinted that they wouldn't just rename them to something else [like levels], as that wouldn't actually remove any of the inherent problems), the entire Veteran itemization will have to be redone, so it is easier in the short-term to increase the VRs than to fudge up the itemization system before they need to.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Does Eric have a forum account? If so, it would be good to get his own wording for this, as I don't like to paraphrase something that I'm vaguely recalling from last week

VictoriaRachel

My main concern is that in the ESO Live when this was announced the increase to v16 they stated that they still wanted to remove Veteran Ranks but it was a "long term" goal. If things that come "soon" take over a year to be implemented I can not imagine how long it takes to implement "long term" plans. Even more worrying was they were raising the cap to V16 "for now" and even clarified with the other presenter that 16 was the correct number because they are working on a lot of different things. That to me says we should be prepared for more rises in the future.

I understand it is their hope to remove them. I just worry hope is not enough. If they are avoiding dealing with it, putting it off as something to tackle in the future, it will either not happen or simply be too late.

AngryNord

Wakkoo wrote: »

Can someone explain what is going on here?

ZOS logic..

RavenSkylord

Enodoc wrote: »

Eric answered this quite well on ESO Live, but the reason is essentially due to itemization. In order to have some "new, better gear" with the next content update, there needs to be a VR rank increase to go with it so that it is balanced properly. When VRs are removed (and Eric hinted that they wouldn't just rename them to something else [like levels], as that wouldn't actually remove any of the inherent problems), the entire Veteran itemization will have to be redone, so it is easier in the short-term to increase the VRs than to fudge up the itemization system before they need to.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Does Eric have a forum account? If so, it would be good to get his own wording for this, as I don't like to paraphrase something that I'm vaguely recalling from last week

Appreciate the info, have never really been too interested in podcasts, would rather play the game, but perhaps I should check it out sometime. If information is only being given through it.

My suspicions confirmed. Figured it had to be along those lines

Olivierko

I can answer your question, "The Ballmer Peak" isn't that easy to reach, and it's a fine line between great success and total catastrophic failure.

Sallington

Enodoc wrote: »

Eric answered this quite well on ESO Live, but the reason is essentially due to itemization. In order to have some "new, better gear" with the next content update, there needs to be a VR rank increase to go with it so that it is balanced properly. When VRs are removed (and Eric hinted that they wouldn't just rename them to something else [like levels], as that wouldn't actually remove any of the inherent problems), the entire Veteran itemization will have to be redone, so it is easier in the short-term to increase the VRs than to fudge up the itemization system before they need to.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Does Eric have a forum account? If so, it would be good to get his own wording for this, as I don't like to paraphrase something that I'm vaguely recalling from last week

I see that as a problem. Adding more Vet ranks can't make removing them any easier. It seems like it would just make it harder, making it harder to implement if it's ever implemented at all.

The removal of VRs is either going to make the game much much better, or it's going to be the NGE of Elder Scrolls. And the longer it takes to implement, and the more ingrained VR ranks become, the closer to an NGE it will be.

I feel like they could have just as easily (probably even easier) added a new zone or IC without a level cap increase. I haven't seen one person on the forums ever ask for a cap increase.

Pman85

i thought i heard something from the latest ESO live that they plan to use the VR increase to further the balance in the game, and that this is a step towards removal.

RobDaCool

I'll never get to V5 let alone V15 or V16 lol

GreySix

Because ...

Elsonso

Wakkoo wrote: »

I dont understand this. If ZOS plan to get rid of VR ranks, why do they raise the cap for it instead of working on with a better replacement feature/system? They are supporting a system they plan to remove?

Can someone explain what is going on here? I just dont get the logic

Aside from the opinions about whether or not to increase the maximum Veteran Rank, the practical base answer is simply that the work required to remove the Veteran Ranks and fix related quests, itemization, NPCs, monsters, etc is work that is not completed. Until this work is completed, the Veteran System is still in play, so whatever they do that impacts the end-game needs to take the Veteran System into account.

As to why they bother to increase the maximum Veteran Rank at all, as they have done twice in the past, with a similar response from the players... From what I have seen, it is to provide room for both itemization and character growth due to new zone content being introduced. The last two times they have introduced new zone content, they have increased the maximum Veteran Rank by two.

Prizax

They are going to keep adding 2 veteran levels each new zone...

Pallmor

I love the way the guy got uncomfortable on ESO Live when the one lady said "But the plan is still to remove them." He was quick to jump in with an awkward "Well......that is a *goal*....long-term."

In short, Veteran Ranks aren't going anywhere. They made that obvious when they not only didn't take them out before the console release, but actually used them as a selling point in the console release trailer. Adding two more levels only further confirms what has been obvious for some time now. The VR ranks are here to stay.

Enodoc

Pallmor wrote: »

In short, Veteran Ranks aren't going anywhere. They made that obvious when they not only didn't take them out before the console release, but actually used them as a selling point in the console release trailer.

They didn't mention Veteran Ranks by name in the console trailer, they said Veteran, and the Veteran content isn't going anywhere.

Sausage

Too small staff, they had bigger staff at launch, people get fired, stuff didnt get finished, now they got all kind of unfinished stuff AKA MMORPG gone bad. VR removal was promised already in 1.6.

nimander99

Good question @Wakkoo i think the answer is because this zone has been mostly done for over a year and was built long before their was ever an idea to remove Ranks, so to go back into the code and re-write it without having the algorithm to change the entire system in-place it just doesn't make sense. Hope this helps

F7sus4

Leandor wrote: »

My crystal ball tells me it is because the veteran ranks will not go away as in "deleted" but they will be converted to normal levels

I'm really glad people started to agree with this idea. 3-4 months ago a few guys at the forums including me were shouted at for merely stating that VR system removal will be solved this way. Yay!

And let's be honest - 64th level versus VR14: "It's just the name, both are the same."

Ace_of_Destiny

Why improve refining oil into gasoline if they intend to go all electric automobile eventually?

Because until you get a full answer to a problem you have to continue to address the problem any way you can.

biovitalb16_ESO

Vet ranks are artificial content. It gives you the illusion there is stuff in the game when really its just killing mobs again. It also extends the gear grind which again is artificial content since we'll all be wearing the exact same crap just with a shiny "VR16" on it instead of "VR14".

As for them being removed..I am sure we will still be spewing that out when we are all grinding toward VR50.

MCMancub

Sallington wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Eric answered this quite well on ESO Live, but the reason is essentially due to itemization. In order to have some "new, better gear" with the next content update, there needs to be a VR rank increase to go with it so that it is balanced properly. When VRs are removed (and Eric hinted that they wouldn't just rename them to something else [like levels], as that wouldn't actually remove any of the inherent problems), the entire Veteran itemization will have to be redone, so it is easier in the short-term to increase the VRs than to fudge up the itemization system before they need to.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Does Eric have a forum account? If so, it would be good to get his own wording for this, as I don't like to paraphrase something that I'm vaguely recalling from last week

I see that as a problem. Adding more Vet ranks can't make removing them any easier. It seems like it would just make it harder, making it harder to implement if it's ever implemented at all.

The removal of VRs is either going to make the game much much better, or it's going to be the NGE of Elder Scrolls. And the longer it takes to implement, and the more ingrained VR ranks become, the closer to an NGE it will be.

I feel like they could have just as easily (probably even easier) added a new zone or IC without a level cap increase. I haven't seen one person on the forums ever ask for a cap increase.

I'm not entirely sure about this. Someone else pointed out that 14 veteran ranks are really hard to subdivide. Your divisors are 2 and 7, whereas with 16 you get 4. There are 4 crafting tiers in the veteran ranks. Subdividing each crafting tier into 16 veteran ranks is much easier than 14. Perhaps this is what they were going for?

Sallington

MCMancub wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Eric answered this quite well on ESO Live, but the reason is essentially due to itemization. In order to have some "new, better gear" with the next content update, there needs to be a VR rank increase to go with it so that it is balanced properly. When VRs are removed (and Eric hinted that they wouldn't just rename them to something else [like levels], as that wouldn't actually remove any of the inherent problems), the entire Veteran itemization will have to be redone, so it is easier in the short-term to increase the VRs than to fudge up the itemization system before they need to.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Does Eric have a forum account? If so, it would be good to get his own wording for this, as I don't like to paraphrase something that I'm vaguely recalling from last week

I see that as a problem. Adding more Vet ranks can't make removing them any easier. It seems like it would just make it harder, making it harder to implement if it's ever implemented at all.

The removal of VRs is either going to make the game much much better, or it's going to be the NGE of Elder Scrolls. And the longer it takes to implement, and the more ingrained VR ranks become, the closer to an NGE it will be.

I feel like they could have just as easily (probably even easier) added a new zone or IC without a level cap increase. I haven't seen one person on the forums ever ask for a cap increase.

I'm not entirely sure about this. Someone else pointed out that 14 veteran ranks are really hard to subdivide. Your divisors are 2 and 7, whereas with 16 you get 4. There are 4 crafting tiers in the veteran ranks. Subdividing each crafting tier into 16 veteran ranks is much easier than 14. Perhaps this is what they were going for?

That would make sense. IT would be super cool of them to be more transparent with their plans so we didn't have all this speculation back and forth.

MCMancub

Sallington wrote: »

MCMancub wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Eric answered this quite well on ESO Live, but the reason is essentially due to itemization. In order to have some "new, better gear" with the next content update, there needs to be a VR rank increase to go with it so that it is balanced properly. When VRs are removed (and Eric hinted that they wouldn't just rename them to something else [like levels], as that wouldn't actually remove any of the inherent problems), the entire Veteran itemization will have to be redone, so it is easier in the short-term to increase the VRs than to fudge up the itemization system before they need to.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Does Eric have a forum account? If so, it would be good to get his own wording for this, as I don't like to paraphrase something that I'm vaguely recalling from last week

I see that as a problem. Adding more Vet ranks can't make removing them any easier. It seems like it would just make it harder, making it harder to implement if it's ever implemented at all.

The removal of VRs is either going to make the game much much better, or it's going to be the NGE of Elder Scrolls. And the longer it takes to implement, and the more ingrained VR ranks become, the closer to an NGE it will be.

I feel like they could have just as easily (probably even easier) added a new zone or IC without a level cap increase. I haven't seen one person on the forums ever ask for a cap increase.

I'm not entirely sure about this. Someone else pointed out that 14 veteran ranks are really hard to subdivide. Your divisors are 2 and 7, whereas with 16 you get 4. There are 4 crafting tiers in the veteran ranks. Subdividing each crafting tier into 16 veteran ranks is much easier than 14. Perhaps this is what they were going for?

That would make sense. IT would be super cool of them to be more transparent with their plans so we didn't have all this speculation back and forth.

I know we're getting a lot of information on Monday, but we don't even know what they're going to talk about. I agree, they need to go over this stuff in detail on Monday.

Elsonso

MCMancub wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

MCMancub wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Eric answered this quite well on ESO Live, but the reason is essentially due to itemization. In order to have some "new, better gear" with the next content update, there needs to be a VR rank increase to go with it so that it is balanced properly. When VRs are removed (and Eric hinted that they wouldn't just rename them to something else [like levels], as that wouldn't actually remove any of the inherent problems), the entire Veteran itemization will have to be redone, so it is easier in the short-term to increase the VRs than to fudge up the itemization system before they need to.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Does Eric have a forum account? If so, it would be good to get his own wording for this, as I don't like to paraphrase something that I'm vaguely recalling from last week

I see that as a problem. Adding more Vet ranks can't make removing them any easier. It seems like it would just make it harder, making it harder to implement if it's ever implemented at all.

The removal of VRs is either going to make the game much much better, or it's going to be the NGE of Elder Scrolls. And the longer it takes to implement, and the more ingrained VR ranks become, the closer to an NGE it will be.

I feel like they could have just as easily (probably even easier) added a new zone or IC without a level cap increase. I haven't seen one person on the forums ever ask for a cap increase.

I'm not entirely sure about this. Someone else pointed out that 14 veteran ranks are really hard to subdivide. Your divisors are 2 and 7, whereas with 16 you get 4. There are 4 crafting tiers in the veteran ranks. Subdividing each crafting tier into 16 veteran ranks is much easier than 14. Perhaps this is what they were going for?

That would make sense. IT would be super cool of them to be more transparent with their plans so we didn't have all this speculation back and forth.

I know we're getting a lot of information on Monday, but we don't even know what they're going to talk about. I agree, they need to go over this stuff in detail on Monday.

1. There will be a video and some articles posted that talk about the Imperial City.
2. The Imperial City contains several systems that will be introduced and explained in videos and articles.
3. They will say when they want to have the Imperial City update on PTS
4. Any talk of dates will be generic... like "this week", "next month".. in other words, "Soon"
5. There will be a Road Ahead, the second of three that we will see in 2015.
6. Most of the detail will be reserved for when it is on PTS

MCMancub

lordrichter wrote: »

MCMancub wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

MCMancub wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Eric answered this quite well on ESO Live, but the reason is essentially due to itemization. In order to have some "new, better gear" with the next content update, there needs to be a VR rank increase to go with it so that it is balanced properly. When VRs are removed (and Eric hinted that they wouldn't just rename them to something else [like levels], as that wouldn't actually remove any of the inherent problems), the entire Veteran itemization will have to be redone, so it is easier in the short-term to increase the VRs than to fudge up the itemization system before they need to.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Does Eric have a forum account? If so, it would be good to get his own wording for this, as I don't like to paraphrase something that I'm vaguely recalling from last week

I see that as a problem. Adding more Vet ranks can't make removing them any easier. It seems like it would just make it harder, making it harder to implement if it's ever implemented at all.

The removal of VRs is either going to make the game much much better, or it's going to be the NGE of Elder Scrolls. And the longer it takes to implement, and the more ingrained VR ranks become, the closer to an NGE it will be.

I feel like they could have just as easily (probably even easier) added a new zone or IC without a level cap increase. I haven't seen one person on the forums ever ask for a cap increase.

I'm not entirely sure about this. Someone else pointed out that 14 veteran ranks are really hard to subdivide. Your divisors are 2 and 7, whereas with 16 you get 4. There are 4 crafting tiers in the veteran ranks. Subdividing each crafting tier into 16 veteran ranks is much easier than 14. Perhaps this is what they were going for?

That would make sense. IT would be super cool of them to be more transparent with their plans so we didn't have all this speculation back and forth.

I know we're getting a lot of information on Monday, but we don't even know what they're going to talk about. I agree, they need to go over this stuff in detail on Monday.

1. There will be a video and some articles posted that talk about the Imperial City.
2. The Imperial City contains several systems that will be introduced and explained in videos and articles.
3. They will say when they want to have the Imperial City update on PTS
4. Any talk of dates will be generic... like "this week", "next month".. in other words, "Soon"
5. There will be a Road Ahead, the second of three that we will see in 2015.
6. Most of the detail will be reserved for when it is on PTS

I was referring more to the why than the what. I should have been more clear. It would be nice if they said "We are doing X because ..."

mrskinskull

I don't think they will remove them.

Sallington

MCMancub wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

MCMancub wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

MCMancub wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Eric answered this quite well on ESO Live, but the reason is essentially due to itemization. In order to have some "new, better gear" with the next content update, there needs to be a VR rank increase to go with it so that it is balanced properly. When VRs are removed (and Eric hinted that they wouldn't just rename them to something else [like levels], as that wouldn't actually remove any of the inherent problems), the entire Veteran itemization will have to be redone, so it is easier in the short-term to increase the VRs than to fudge up the itemization system before they need to.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Does Eric have a forum account? If so, it would be good to get his own wording for this, as I don't like to paraphrase something that I'm vaguely recalling from last week

I see that as a problem. Adding more Vet ranks can't make removing them any easier. It seems like it would just make it harder, making it harder to implement if it's ever implemented at all.

The removal of VRs is either going to make the game much much better, or it's going to be the NGE of Elder Scrolls. And the longer it takes to implement, and the more ingrained VR ranks become, the closer to an NGE it will be.

I feel like they could have just as easily (probably even easier) added a new zone or IC without a level cap increase. I haven't seen one person on the forums ever ask for a cap increase.

I'm not entirely sure about this. Someone else pointed out that 14 veteran ranks are really hard to subdivide. Your divisors are 2 and 7, whereas with 16 you get 4. There are 4 crafting tiers in the veteran ranks. Subdividing each crafting tier into 16 veteran ranks is much easier than 14. Perhaps this is what they were going for?

That would make sense. IT would be super cool of them to be more transparent with their plans so we didn't have all this speculation back and forth.

I know we're getting a lot of information on Monday, but we don't even know what they're going to talk about. I agree, they need to go over this stuff in detail on Monday.

1. There will be a video and some articles posted that talk about the Imperial City.
2. The Imperial City contains several systems that will be introduced and explained in videos and articles.
3. They will say when they want to have the Imperial City update on PTS
4. Any talk of dates will be generic... like "this week", "next month".. in other words, "Soon"
5. There will be a Road Ahead, the second of three that we will see in 2015.
6. Most of the detail will be reserved for when it is on PTS

I was referring more to the why than the what. I should have been more clear. It would be nice if they said "We are doing X because ..."

I never thought of it that way but you're right. We don't know much of their reasoning for anything, only vague plans.

Divinius

Ace-2112 wrote: »

Why improve refining oil into gasoline if they intend to go all electric automobile eventually?

Because until you get a full answer to a problem you have to continue to address the problem any way you can.

Good analogy, but the main difference is that all electric automobiles will actually happen someday.