We will be performing maintenance for patch 11.2.2 on the PTS on Monday at 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC).
Maintenance for the week of September 29:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 29, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 29, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
@ZOS - why no class advocate or dev led class discussion topics?
-
Dracane✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭kkampaseb17_ESO wrote: »kkampaseb17_ESO wrote: »kkampaseb17_ESO wrote: »@Dracane by your logic, NB and DKs should be bad at magicka abilities and have mostly stamina morphs because when you hear the term Night blade you think of melee weapons and Dragonknight you think of heavy armour melee knights. Now I would be one of the first to agree magicka sorcerers have issues and would be basically useless without Hardened ward and overload and maybe crystal shards. But let's not blame stamina sorcerers. zos came up with a class system and decided that any weapons should usable by any class - stamina sorcerers are just trying to turn that promise into reality.
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is, that Sorcerer should be the best mage, Nightblade the best stealth class, Templar the best Healer and Dragonknights the best tanks. And still, they should be able to perform other roles.
And if you're honest with yourself, that's what Zenimax tried to achieve with these classes. Obviously
And which is the best class for a true DPS fighter...which means not stealth....no divine *** etc? Which is the best class for a true hybrid? Your argument holds no water.
Who says there is one best class for this ? There is no best class for this and I never claimed this. So yes, my argument holds water and even a river.
So you are saying....ZOS made a best class for magicka orientation, a best class for stealth rogue style play, a best class for a healer but no best class for a in-your-face fighter? It is that far fetched eh?
ZOS DIDN'T MAKE ANY CLASSES WITH THAT IN MIND. And you can understand this when at some moments magicka NBs were better at magicka compared to magicka Sorcs. When this game was designed ALL class abilities were magicka based. Not a single one was stamina based. So how can you claim one class was supposed to be the better mage? Stamina oriented builds were an afterthought at the start of the game. ZOS thought that by adding weapon lines with stamina would solve the problem. It didn't. And it showed. That is why you see all the new stamina morphs which started after 1.1 patch.
The moment you put that in your head you will start to contribute better in these conversations. Sorcerer doesn't mean anything. Sorcerer is a swordmage as well. Sorcerer is a spellsword as well.
Aha. Don't know what you want to tell me and why you think, a Sorcerer is a sword mage or whatever. A Battlemage might be a swordmage.
They made changes to classes, because this was needed for diversity and because there was no real point in playing a stamina build. Sometimes, decisions have to be reconsidered. I am aware of this and don't need you to remind me.
Templar still IS the best healer, Dragonknight still IS the best tank and Nightblade IS the best stealth class. You want to deny this ?
No I do not deny it. However, you can play NB without being based on stealth if you make a tank. You can play DK as a mage pretty competitively. You can play your NB as a mage competitively. So what is your point in the end. I don't see why you shouldn't be able to play a sorcerer as stamina pretty competitively because some people have linked the name to a bathrobe wimp with a broomstick although the Elder Scrolls lore is so much more forgiving.
Omg what do you want ? I never said, that a Templar is doomed to be a healer only or a Nightblade necessarily a stealth oriented one. My point was, that each class has a strenght.Auri-El is my lord,
Trinimac is my shield,
Magnus is my mind.
My debut album on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Gleandra/videos0 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
Elder Scrolls traditions regarding skills and roles don't mean squat in a game with pre-defined classes and exclusive class skills.ColoursYouHave wrote: »
Agreed. Sorcerer is a mage, no Warrior. Sad to see how our own kind totally conquers this class and turns it into a fancy warrior. I can only repeat myself: I'm glad Zenimax found intelligent ways to not destroy Magicka Sorcerers. So far.... who knows where this is leading.
Apparently you are not too familiar with Elder Scrolls lore, which features multiple archetypes combining spells and weapon combat, such as a spellsword or a battlemage.
Exactly. Classes are defined by the developers and don't necessarily fit into the lore. They are pre-made ideas to help the player to find his path. That's why you can build your own class since Morrowind, well actually since Arena even.
And the classes in TESO... never saw such things in the Elder Scrolls before. I have no problem with this, but if people consider classes part of the lore..... well
"Classes are defined by the developers..." but if they define something counter to exactly what I want my sorcerer to be or even hint at it, then I'm going to post the same thing in every related thread over and over because sorcerer should be designed how I want it.
"I have no problem with this..." except that I do, and will ramble to the end about how sorcs are supposed to be played my way even though it's counter to how ESO is set up and counter to the fluidity and customization of builds that ESO espouses; even though most of the changes requested for stam sorcs wouldn't even touch the current magicka meta for sorcs.
Gotcha.
Edited by Zheg on August 22, 2015 4:08PM1 -
CP5✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭kkampaseb17_ESO wrote: »kkampaseb17_ESO wrote: »kkampaseb17_ESO wrote: »@Dracane by your logic, NB and DKs should be bad at magicka abilities and have mostly stamina morphs because when you hear the term Night blade you think of melee weapons and Dragonknight you think of heavy armour melee knights. Now I would be one of the first to agree magicka sorcerers have issues and would be basically useless without Hardened ward and overload and maybe crystal shards. But let's not blame stamina sorcerers. zos came up with a class system and decided that any weapons should usable by any class - stamina sorcerers are just trying to turn that promise into reality.
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is, that Sorcerer should be the best mage, Nightblade the best stealth class, Templar the best Healer and Dragonknights the best tanks. And still, they should be able to perform other roles.
And if you're honest with yourself, that's what Zenimax tried to achieve with these classes. Obviously
And which is the best class for a true DPS fighter...which means not stealth....no divine *** etc? Which is the best class for a true hybrid? Your argument holds no water.
Who says there is one best class for this ? There is no best class for this and I never claimed this. So yes, my argument holds water and even a river.
So you are saying....ZOS made a best class for magicka orientation, a best class for stealth rogue style play, a best class for a healer but no best class for a in-your-face fighter? It is that far fetched eh?
ZOS DIDN'T MAKE ANY CLASSES WITH THAT IN MIND. And you can understand this when at some moments magicka NBs were better at magicka compared to magicka Sorcs. When this game was designed ALL class abilities were magicka based. Not a single one was stamina based. So how can you claim one class was supposed to be the better mage? Stamina oriented builds were an afterthought at the start of the game. ZOS thought that by adding weapon lines with stamina would solve the problem. It didn't. And it showed. That is why you see all the new stamina morphs which started after 1.1 patch.
The moment you put that in your head you will start to contribute better in these conversations. Sorcerer doesn't mean anything. Sorcerer is a swordmage as well. Sorcerer is a spellsword as well.
Aha. Don't know what you want to tell me and why you think, a Sorcerer is a sword mage or whatever. A Battlemage might be a swordmage.
They made changes to classes, because this was needed for diversity and because there was no real point in playing a stamina build. Sometimes, decisions have to be reconsidered. I am aware of this and don't need you to remind me.
Templar still IS the best healer, Dragonknight still IS the best tank and Nightblade IS the best stealth class. You want to deny this ?
No I do not deny it. However, you can play NB without being based on stealth if you make a tank. You can play DK as a mage pretty competitively. You can play your NB as a mage competitively. So what is your point in the end. I don't see why you shouldn't be able to play a sorcerer as stamina pretty competitively because some people have linked the name to a bathrobe wimp with a broomstick although the Elder Scrolls lore is so much more forgiving.
Omg what do you want ? I never said, that a Templar is doomed to be a healer only or a Nightblade necessarily a stealth oriented one. My point was, that each class has a strenght.
Then how can the sorcerer apply their strength to multiple roles if their skills and passives don't allow it?0 -
kkampaseb17_ESO✭✭✭
Elder Scrolls traditions regarding skills and roles don't mean squat in a game with pre-defined classes and exclusive class skills.ColoursYouHave wrote: »
Agreed. Sorcerer is a mage, no Warrior. Sad to see how our own kind totally conquers this class and turns it into a fancy warrior. I can only repeat myself: I'm glad Zenimax found intelligent ways to not destroy Magicka Sorcerers. So far.... who knows where this is leading.
Apparently you are not too familiar with Elder Scrolls lore, which features multiple archetypes combining spells and weapon combat, such as a spellsword or a battlemage.
Exactly. Classes are defined by the developers and don't necessarily fit into the lore. They are pre-made ideas to help the player to find his path. That's why you can build your own class since Morrowind, well actually since Arena even.
And the classes in TESO... never saw such things in the Elder Scrolls before. I have no problem with this, but if people consider classes part of the lore..... well
"Classes are defined by the developers..." but if they define something counter to exactly what I want my sorcerer to be or even hint at it, then I'm going to post the same thing in every related thread over and over because sorcerer should be designed how I want it.
"I have no problem with this..." except that I do, and will ramble to the end about how sorcs are supposed to be played my way even though it's counter to how ESO is set up and counter to the fluidity and customization of builds that ESO espouses; even though most of the changes requested for stam sorcs wouldn't even touch the current magicka meta for sorcs.
Gotcha.
Ouch...don't hit the nail in the head so hard....it hurts.0 -
VincentBlanquin✭✭✭Hm. At this point I have to admit, that since this game exists, I felt like we players are imature kids and Zenimax are strict parents. They make decisions, but don't tell the kids until it happens, because they think kids are too stupid to understand it anyway and have no right to give their opinion.
Might sound harsh, but I never lost this feeling. I don't know, why there is no better communication between them and us.
I feel like I'm talking to god when talking to Zenimax, praying and hoping he hears me and makes my wishes come true.
as i see it -
Zenimax : "Here is golden egg (eso) for you guys, probably have some minor isues, but its hardly worth of mention it, so enjoy that golden egg"
they are too stubbornly convinced that their game is so perfect, it makes me feel to :puke:
this class advocate is one thing that can open their eyes
Edited by VincentBlanquin on August 22, 2015 4:16PMIrwen Vincinter - Nord - Dragonknight
Irw´en - Bosmer - Nightblade1 -
Dracane✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Elder Scrolls traditions regarding skills and roles don't mean squat in a game with pre-defined classes and exclusive class skills.ColoursYouHave wrote: »
Agreed. Sorcerer is a mage, no Warrior. Sad to see how our own kind totally conquers this class and turns it into a fancy warrior. I can only repeat myself: I'm glad Zenimax found intelligent ways to not destroy Magicka Sorcerers. So far.... who knows where this is leading.
Apparently you are not too familiar with Elder Scrolls lore, which features multiple archetypes combining spells and weapon combat, such as a spellsword or a battlemage.
Exactly. Classes are defined by the developers and don't necessarily fit into the lore. They are pre-made ideas to help the player to find his path. That's why you can build your own class since Morrowind, well actually since Arena even.
And the classes in TESO... never saw such things in the Elder Scrolls before. I have no problem with this, but if people consider classes part of the lore..... well
"Classes are defined by the developers..." but if they define something counter to exactly what I want my sorcerer to be or even hint at it, then I'm going to post the same thing in every related thread over and over because sorcerer should be designed how I want it.
"I have no problem with this..." except that I do, and will ramble to the end about how sorcs are supposed to be played my way even though it's counter to how ESO is set up and counter to the fluidity and customization of builds that ESO espouses; even though most of the changes requested for stam sorcs wouldn't even touch the current magicka meta for sorcs.
Gotcha.
Awww what a lovely write up, so much sarcasm.
Please....Auri-El is my lord,
Trinimac is my shield,
Magnus is my mind.
My debut album on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Gleandra/videos0 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
Elder Scrolls traditions regarding skills and roles don't mean squat in a game with pre-defined classes and exclusive class skills.ColoursYouHave wrote: »
Agreed. Sorcerer is a mage, no Warrior. Sad to see how our own kind totally conquers this class and turns it into a fancy warrior. I can only repeat myself: I'm glad Zenimax found intelligent ways to not destroy Magicka Sorcerers. So far.... who knows where this is leading.
Apparently you are not too familiar with Elder Scrolls lore, which features multiple archetypes combining spells and weapon combat, such as a spellsword or a battlemage.
Exactly. Classes are defined by the developers and don't necessarily fit into the lore. They are pre-made ideas to help the player to find his path. That's why you can build your own class since Morrowind, well actually since Arena even.
And the classes in TESO... never saw such things in the Elder Scrolls before. I have no problem with this, but if people consider classes part of the lore..... well
"Classes are defined by the developers..." but if they define something counter to exactly what I want my sorcerer to be or even hint at it, then I'm going to post the same thing in every related thread over and over because sorcerer should be designed how I want it.
"I have no problem with this..." except that I do, and will ramble to the end about how sorcs are supposed to be played my way even though it's counter to how ESO is set up and counter to the fluidity and customization of builds that ESO espouses; even though most of the changes requested for stam sorcs wouldn't even touch the current magicka meta for sorcs.
Gotcha.
Awww what a lovely write up, so much sarcasm.
Please....
Well, at least you can appreciate good sarcasm. Here's hoping that one day you'll be able to appreciate good fixes for sorcs as well.0 -
Dracane✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Elder Scrolls traditions regarding skills and roles don't mean squat in a game with pre-defined classes and exclusive class skills.ColoursYouHave wrote: »
Agreed. Sorcerer is a mage, no Warrior. Sad to see how our own kind totally conquers this class and turns it into a fancy warrior. I can only repeat myself: I'm glad Zenimax found intelligent ways to not destroy Magicka Sorcerers. So far.... who knows where this is leading.
Apparently you are not too familiar with Elder Scrolls lore, which features multiple archetypes combining spells and weapon combat, such as a spellsword or a battlemage.
Exactly. Classes are defined by the developers and don't necessarily fit into the lore. They are pre-made ideas to help the player to find his path. That's why you can build your own class since Morrowind, well actually since Arena even.
And the classes in TESO... never saw such things in the Elder Scrolls before. I have no problem with this, but if people consider classes part of the lore..... well
"Classes are defined by the developers..." but if they define something counter to exactly what I want my sorcerer to be or even hint at it, then I'm going to post the same thing in every related thread over and over because sorcerer should be designed how I want it.
"I have no problem with this..." except that I do, and will ramble to the end about how sorcs are supposed to be played my way even though it's counter to how ESO is set up and counter to the fluidity and customization of builds that ESO espouses; even though most of the changes requested for stam sorcs wouldn't even touch the current magicka meta for sorcs.
Gotcha.
Awww what a lovely write up, so much sarcasm.
Please....
Well, at least you can appreciate good sarcasm. Here's hoping that one day you'll be able to appreciate good fixes for sorcs as well.
Mind giving me some examples to help my memory ? (no sarcasm)Auri-El is my lord,
Trinimac is my shield,
Magnus is my mind.
My debut album on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Gleandra/videos0 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
Elder Scrolls traditions regarding skills and roles don't mean squat in a game with pre-defined classes and exclusive class skills.ColoursYouHave wrote: »
Agreed. Sorcerer is a mage, no Warrior. Sad to see how our own kind totally conquers this class and turns it into a fancy warrior. I can only repeat myself: I'm glad Zenimax found intelligent ways to not destroy Magicka Sorcerers. So far.... who knows where this is leading.
Apparently you are not too familiar with Elder Scrolls lore, which features multiple archetypes combining spells and weapon combat, such as a spellsword or a battlemage.
Exactly. Classes are defined by the developers and don't necessarily fit into the lore. They are pre-made ideas to help the player to find his path. That's why you can build your own class since Morrowind, well actually since Arena even.
And the classes in TESO... never saw such things in the Elder Scrolls before. I have no problem with this, but if people consider classes part of the lore..... well
"Classes are defined by the developers..." but if they define something counter to exactly what I want my sorcerer to be or even hint at it, then I'm going to post the same thing in every related thread over and over because sorcerer should be designed how I want it.
"I have no problem with this..." except that I do, and will ramble to the end about how sorcs are supposed to be played my way even though it's counter to how ESO is set up and counter to the fluidity and customization of builds that ESO espouses; even though most of the changes requested for stam sorcs wouldn't even touch the current magicka meta for sorcs.
Gotcha.
Awww what a lovely write up, so much sarcasm.
Please....
Well, at least you can appreciate good sarcasm. Here's hoping that one day you'll be able to appreciate good fixes for sorcs as well.
Mind giving me some examples to help my memory ? (no sarcasm)
A simple search for "stamina sorc" pulls up about a dozen related threads. You've posted in most of them, so you should be familiar with them. I'd like to not derail this thread into yet another sorc thread.
@ OP, I honestly don't think they have enough staff to take the additional roles of class leads, even though we'd only be talking about 4 people. Eric Wroebel is the lead for class balance, and while some good changes have come down the pipe, an equal number (if not more) make little sense, and sometimes the good changes are obvious ones that take 6+ months to make it into the game. It's hard enough to get them to be vocal and forthcoming on the forums. I feel like even if we had class leads, someone would shine like Rich and be vocal and involved, but the others would be ZOS status quo forum avoiders.
0 -
Dracane✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Elder Scrolls traditions regarding skills and roles don't mean squat in a game with pre-defined classes and exclusive class skills.ColoursYouHave wrote: »
Agreed. Sorcerer is a mage, no Warrior. Sad to see how our own kind totally conquers this class and turns it into a fancy warrior. I can only repeat myself: I'm glad Zenimax found intelligent ways to not destroy Magicka Sorcerers. So far.... who knows where this is leading.
Apparently you are not too familiar with Elder Scrolls lore, which features multiple archetypes combining spells and weapon combat, such as a spellsword or a battlemage.
Exactly. Classes are defined by the developers and don't necessarily fit into the lore. They are pre-made ideas to help the player to find his path. That's why you can build your own class since Morrowind, well actually since Arena even.
And the classes in TESO... never saw such things in the Elder Scrolls before. I have no problem with this, but if people consider classes part of the lore..... well
"Classes are defined by the developers..." but if they define something counter to exactly what I want my sorcerer to be or even hint at it, then I'm going to post the same thing in every related thread over and over because sorcerer should be designed how I want it.
"I have no problem with this..." except that I do, and will ramble to the end about how sorcs are supposed to be played my way even though it's counter to how ESO is set up and counter to the fluidity and customization of builds that ESO espouses; even though most of the changes requested for stam sorcs wouldn't even touch the current magicka meta for sorcs.
Gotcha.
Awww what a lovely write up, so much sarcasm.
Please....
Well, at least you can appreciate good sarcasm. Here's hoping that one day you'll be able to appreciate good fixes for sorcs as well.
Mind giving me some examples to help my memory ? (no sarcasm)
A simple search for "stamina sorc" pulls up about a dozen related threads. You've posted in most of them, so you should be familiar with them. I'd like to not derail this thread into yet another sorc thread.
Ah, you're talking about Stamina Sorcerer fixes. Then we're having a misunderstanding I suppose.Auri-El is my lord,
Trinimac is my shield,
Magnus is my mind.
My debut album on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Gleandra/videos0 -
Wreuntzylla✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I'm not understanding certain decisions made by ZOS in regards to class and build tweaking and I'd love to get some insight into the thought process for these decisions. For example, stamina sorcs have been requesting a stam morph for crystal blast since 1.6 hit PTS, but maybe we are all wasting our time and in your combat team's opinion, this was never an option. It would be great if we had class advocates that could relay information back and forth between the devs and the players. An alternative is to have a class vision dev post for each class where devs can post why they make the decisions they do. For example, is it a conscious effort to only give stam dks dot based class abilities that scale with stamina?
I think it's important for ZOS to relay their own ideas of what each classes vision is and it would go a long way to let your players offer valid suggestions that actually fit within the devs vision of the class.
ZoS does not have class advocates or class vision posts because players would not like the vision, or the answers to their questions.
A gaming company's goal is to maximize revenue, not make a perfectly balanced game. If you review the various published studies on gaming, the stuff that people complain about routinely is often the same stuff that keeps people playing the longest or conserves internal resources with minimal impact. Like rotating which class is the most powerful.
The only true balancing a gaming company attempts is balancing the length of a grind against the 80-90% confidence interval with respect to player tolerance, and the cost of an item in the store versus paying player willingness to buy.
0 -
ColoursYouHave✭✭✭✭✭
✭
In past games, a Night blade was as much a mage as a Sorcerer, but both used the spells for very different roles. Don't see people arguing that nb's can be more than one thing.
That's because Nightblades can already play effectively as both a stamina and a magicka build. No need to argue for something that you already have.
And I really don't get why people are so bent out of shape over this. I see all these claims about "a sorcerer is supposed to be this or that." But why? Because other games have done it that way? We all know that the whole Elder Scrolls series really emphasizes characters being proficient in multiple forms as combat, and ZoS has clearly intended to follow suit, as Nightblades, Dragon Knights, and Templars all have effective stamina and magicka builds, yet Sorcerers are essentially pigeon-holed into playing a magicka build, or else be inferior to every other class in the game, whether it be a stamina or magicka build (this is also another case where ZoS clearly intends to follow the pattern of character being proficient in both magicka and stamina, as evidenced by all the recent changes to sorcerers). As somebody else pointed out, if sorcerers should be strictly magicka builds, why aren't dragonknights or nightblades strictly stamina builds. It makes little sense to give 75% of classes the choice to focus on either stamina or magicka, while forcing the one other class to only be able to use magicka. It is clear that ZoS wants any class to be viable whether they specialize in magicka or stamina, yet people are complaining because that doesn't fit their own pre-conceived notions of what a sorcerer should be, despite the fact that it is merely following a precedent set by Elder Scrolls games long ago.
But I guess what I really don't understand is why people are so against it in the first place. Why are people arguing that people should have less options? How does it impact you if ZoS changes some morphs that nobody ever uses to help accommodate what is essentially the only non-viable class/resource poll combination in the game? Are you afraid that stam sorcs will become OP? I guess its possible, but it would require a lot more buffing than ZoS has been doing as of late, and then would eventually get hit by the nerf hammer anyways. I don't think anybody is asking for a stamina sorc that is better than other stamina classes, people just want a stamina sorc that can actually compete with the other classes in the game.1 -
CP5✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭ColoursYouHave wrote: »
In past games, a Night blade was as much a mage as a Sorcerer, but both used the spells for very different roles. Don't see people arguing that nb's can be more than one thing.
That's because Nightblades can already play effectively as both a stamina and a magicka build. No need to argue for something that you already have.
And I really don't get why people are so bent out of shape over this. I see all these claims about "a sorcerer is supposed to be this or that." But why? Because other games have done it that way? We all know that the whole Elder Scrolls series really emphasizes characters being proficient in multiple forms as combat, and ZoS has clearly intended to follow suit, as Nightblades, Dragon Knights, and Templars all have effective stamina and magicka builds, yet Sorcerers are essentially pigeon-holed into playing a magicka build, or else be inferior to every other class in the game, whether it be a stamina or magicka build (this is also another case where ZoS clearly intends to follow the pattern of character being proficient in both magicka and stamina, as evidenced by all the recent changes to sorcerers). As somebody else pointed out, if sorcerers should be strictly magicka builds, why aren't dragonknights or nightblades strictly stamina builds. It makes little sense to give 75% of classes the choice to focus on either stamina or magicka, while forcing the one other class to only be able to use magicka. It is clear that ZoS wants any class to be viable whether they specialize in magicka or stamina, yet people are complaining because that doesn't fit their own pre-conceived notions of what a sorcerer should be, despite the fact that it is merely following a precedent set by Elder Scrolls games long ago.
But I guess what I really don't understand is why people are so against it in the first place. Why are people arguing that people should have less options? How does it impact you if ZoS changes some morphs that nobody ever uses to help accommodate what is essentially the only non-viable class/resource poll combination in the game? Are you afraid that stam sorcs will become OP? I guess its possible, but it would require a lot more buffing than ZoS has been doing as of late, and then would eventually get hit by the nerf hammer anyways. I don't think anybody is asking for a stamina sorc that is better than other stamina classes, people just want a stamina sorc that can actually compete with the other classes in the game.
Thank you for outlining the whole problem here. Hopefully the people at ZOS will get around to implementing more changes and try to communicate their plans a bit better.0