The root of the problem - A lack of limits

dodgehopper_ESO

@DeanTheCat I just had an idea. It is a bit earth shattering, but I was thinking that it might be cool if ESO returned to the old stats of previous TES games. (I think some people's minds were just blown).

Willpower, Intelligence, Personality
Strength, Agility, Speed
Endurance
Luck

If we had to put points in all of these things it could really change the game. Some attributes could represent Damage (Intelligence, Strength) whereas others could represent cost reduction or regeneration (Willpower, Personality, Speed, Agility).
Anyway its just a little brainstorm I had. I doubt it is anything ZoS would implement.

I think in reality they should just find a way to make our damage output have nothing to do with our attributes, and tie it specifically to gear. Our attribute choices could simply represent pools (although they need to find a way to make Health a more meaningful pool than it is currently).

Solariken

OGLezard wrote: »

show previous quotes

Solariken wrote: »

Bravo, OP. I agree with almost everything. Even still, I think there are some abilities and playstyles that need some adjustments which may result in perceived nerfs (Hardened Ward). True balance requires a robust system of meaningful strengths and weaknesses for every class.

Here we go again. Nerf sorcs...oh sorry I meant "adjust harden ward" if you still can't stop those shields and refuse to use shield breaker, then it is most def time to adjust your build and gear choices.

It's not that simple. It's not a question of whether sorcs should be nerfed, it's a question of whether we want a game with good class design.

If we want good design, we need to stick to the rock-paper-scissors concept with classes. It shouldn't make sense that sorcs in particular can very easily build for maximum damage, maximum mobility, maximum sustain, AND maximum mitigation. This is very irresponsible design. All classes need a weakness that is exploitable by other classes with specific counters.

There used to be a pretty good balance in that regard. Sorcs had the best mobility, nightblades had the best escape, templars had the best healing, and dragonknights had the best mitigation. Sadly, those days are long behind us. Now it's pretty much a system where sorcs have everything and nightblades have most things.

I'm sorry, but the best solution is not always to "just buff other classes." In fact sometimes that is a terrible solution. We should be seeing a few balance tweaks and bugged skill fixes a month from ZOS, but instead they let garbage design persist for over a year before they even talk about making adjustments.

Urai

I always think people forget about simply ones experience in these games rather then nerfing and buffing this and that, the guy playing this from the start and never leaves cyrodiil against the guy who just started the game or came from never ending pve gameplay will most likely have his sword between his ribs while he lies on his back at the end (exceptions to every rule I know) what if they had some sort of ranking system based on your time invested in cyrodiil like an Alliance war rank maybe.....eeuuhh..hey..........wait a minute.....

while the following does not solve everything,
it will solve the fun factor people experience in cyro for the difference in a casual or hardcore player imo

What if the alliance war rank truly ment something? Alliance war rank account wide and campaigns based on your rank,
like the people from 1-25 and the people from 26-50 kicking eachothers butt. This way the hardcores can play against eachother and have a challenge. The casual gamer/pvper feels the same challenge fighting against his own more or less.
And if the Tyro wants to play with the big boys he has to step up his game...

Few days ago I saw this YT vid of guild group vs guild group and shockingly for myself, found this really enjoyable to watch and it even looked like a lot of fun. And the reason is because its just casuals vs casuals, the best vs the best, organised vs organised in short ranks vs ranks. these groups running like a lawnmower trough cyro collecting ap by shuffling trough packs of casuals only to go down by an even bigger group or entire faction and then whine about the lag, I believe a ranking based campaign would be more fun for everyone.

The video for curious amongst us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Edz1Dgq-1hQ



I'm sorry, all credits to the uploader Hexxis and I can only imagine what a hassle it takes to set up things like that in this game.

DeanTheCat

Seeing as the forums is yet again filled with nerf thread after nerf thread for everything under the sun, I'll bump this thread up again.

The problem is the CP system and a lack of softcaps. Not individual skills.

dodgehopper_ESO

DeanTheCat wrote: »

Seeing as the forums is yet again filled with nerf thread after nerf thread for everything under the sun, I'll bump this thread up again.

The problem is the CP system and a lack of softcaps. Not individual skills.

Its a topic worthy of discussion.

joleda4ub17_ESO

I was starting to believe that I was alone in my views on games. The OP's post shares most of my concerns and fears. Thank you!

[RANT]

IMHO: Some people play these games to project a persona that they cannot achieve in real life. They want to feel strong, or powerful, or downright godly. Many of these people are very loud and it appears to companies like ZOS that they represent the community due to the amount of volume they create. They get upset at the word nerf before they even read the details. Somehow nerfing their character is personal and requires rebuttals in the form personal insults toward the developers.

I'm one of the dinosaurs that still thinks taking on multiple mobs should require multiple players. The ability to destroy 5 PVE mobs in seconds conditions some players to think they should be able to destroy 5 PVP players in seconds, which is totally ludicrous. There is a person behind each character. There is a person behind each developer. There is a person behind each post. The total lack of respect for other people on these forums is what's destroying this game and the genre. The companies and developers are only giving the loudmouths what they want.

[/RANT]

david.haypreub18_ESO

I agree with the OP. Champion Points are what killed the game for me.

Marto

One of the big issues is that people that grinded feel entitled to having more powerful character. In my guilds, people speculate about the removal of Veteran Ranks, saying that ZOS should give players 10CP per VR.

160 CP

"Why?" I ask my guildmates, and they all reply with "I want to get recompensated by the grinding I did to VR16"

No. The point of removing VR is to simplify the system and aleviate the power creep issues. It's a nerf. A nerf that will affect ALL players by equal amounts.

People need to accept nerfs, the community in general wants to get more and more powerful as they play, with no limit whatsoever. And sadly, ZOS is reinforcing this behavior by making expensive gear so powerful and by rewarding people that grind towards 500+ CP.

GreenSoup2HoT

@DeanTheCat Your a very smart man. Tons of effort put into your topic. Love it.

@Emma_Eunjung I find it funny how every single time i see you comment, i completely disagree with you.

DeanTheCat

@Marto:

At this point, with the CP-cap in place, giving players 10CP per VR isn't going to make that much of a difference. Sure, the number looks bigger on their character sheets, but its pointless because you cannot spend more then 501CP. The idea of the Champion System was nice on paper, but the execution? Not so much. Still, capping the amount of CP you can spend goes a long way into creating properly balanced content and equal power levels in Cyrodiil.

Now if we can get them to lower the bonuses...

@GreenSoup2HoT:

This one is happy that you enjoy his posts.

Humatiel

From a purely logistical standpoint I can find no fault with your logic, or your variety of potential (yes solutions with the potential to actually work) answers. To be quite frank though with all the crap ZoS has put us through I like that I am overpowered as ****, I highly doubt (at this point in time) I would still be playing if I wasn't.

Don't get me wrong I believe that 1.5 was the best time to play and that it provided a good solid "lets work together" mentality, but if we look at the larger picture ZoS clearly doesn't want that. We receive nothing remotely challenging that can occupy our time, overland npc are so pitiful I have afked before and come back and not been dead, vet pledges are laughable, I solo nonvet pledges. Hodor is managing 4 man Sanctum HM and nobody seems to care from the devs standpoint, we have vr5 characters completing AA and Hel Ra because yes.

Much like there will never be a roll back to the difficulty the game started with, their will also never be anything so drastic as the changes you're proposing because players simply won't stay for it. ZoS has been very transparent that game difficulty will always come second to game lore and to that end the more extreme of any environment will always be easier then it should be. So yes, I do enjoy being overpowered because it allows me the flexibility to both play casually and complete content that I want to with no obligatory sense of dedication needed. This game is not Eve, we are not scaling WoW style raids, at no point are guildmasters requiring players to buy($$) gear (not going to mention the game).

Elder Scrolls Online: Casuals Unlimited.

hrothbern

Humatiel wrote: »

From a purely logistical standpoint I can find no fault with your logic, or your variety of potential (yes solutions with the potential to actually work) answers. To be quite frank though with all the crap ZoS has put us through I like that I am overpowered as ****, I highly doubt (at this point in time) I would still be playing if I wasn't.

Don't get me wrong I believe that 1.5 was the best time to play and that it provided a good solid "lets work together" mentality, but if we look at the larger picture ZoS clearly doesn't want that. We receive nothing remotely challenging that can occupy our time, overland npc are so pitiful I have afked before and come back and not been dead, vet pledges are laughable, I solo nonvet pledges. Hodor is managing 4 man Sanctum HM and nobody seems to care from the devs standpoint, we have vr5 characters completing AA and Hel Ra because yes.

Much like there will never be a roll back to the difficulty the game started with, their will also never be anything so drastic as the changes you're proposing because players simply won't stay for it. ZoS has been very transparent that game difficulty will always come second to game lore and to that end the more extreme of any environment will always be easier then it should be. So yes, I do enjoy being overpowered because it allows me the flexibility to both play casually and complete content that I want to with no obligatory sense of dedication needed. This game is not Eve, we are not scaling WoW style raids, at no point are guildmasters requiring players to buy($$) gear (not going to mention the game).

Elder Scrolls Online: Casuals Unlimited.

If we play in the weekend tennis, for fun and fitness, we are most likely casual tennis players enjoying it.
If we look on the television to a Grand Slam tournament, we see awfull good tennis from profi's.

It is both tennis.

I think that in base concept ESO can also handle both
But it will take quite a while before that is under control.

Humatiel

hrothbern wrote: »

show previous quotes

Humatiel wrote: »

From a purely logistical standpoint I can find no fault with your logic, or your variety of potential (yes solutions with the potential to actually work) answers. To be quite frank though with all the crap ZoS has put us through I like that I am overpowered as ****, I highly doubt (at this point in time) I would still be playing if I wasn't.

Don't get me wrong I believe that 1.5 was the best time to play and that it provided a good solid "lets work together" mentality, but if we look at the larger picture ZoS clearly doesn't want that. We receive nothing remotely challenging that can occupy our time, overland npc are so pitiful I have afked before and come back and not been dead, vet pledges are laughable, I solo nonvet pledges. Hodor is managing 4 man Sanctum HM and nobody seems to care from the devs standpoint, we have vr5 characters completing AA and Hel Ra because yes.

Much like there will never be a roll back to the difficulty the game started with, their will also never be anything so drastic as the changes you're proposing because players simply won't stay for it. ZoS has been very transparent that game difficulty will always come second to game lore and to that end the more extreme of any environment will always be easier then it should be. So yes, I do enjoy being overpowered because it allows me the flexibility to both play casually and complete content that I want to with no obligatory sense of dedication needed. This game is not Eve, we are not scaling WoW style raids, at no point are guildmasters requiring players to buy($$) gear (not going to mention the game).

Elder Scrolls Online: Casuals Unlimited.

If we play in the weekend tennis, for fun and fitness, we are most likely casual tennis players enjoying it.
If we look on the television to a Grand Slam tournament, we see awfull good tennis from profi's.

It is both tennis.

I think that in base concept ESO can also handle both
But it will take quite a while before that is under control.

After a point though we must ask, is this worth the effort. Let's assume that ESO lasts another 5 years before the inevitable decline to P2W, alliances forming due to lack of playerbase etc. in two years virtually every sandbox update has been geared entirely toward a more dps intensive playerbase, so we can safely assume that we're looking at two years to return to a more balanced one.

so two years to regain the "beaten path", but in those two years it means an overhaul of all current combat mechanics, mob health, caps, and most important any released and future releases of DLC. at that point the game has turned the "hump" of it's life (per 5 remaining) and reasonably only has a few good years left before the decline. I for one would rather have them work on new content then spend half of their remaining time trying to fix old content.

Merlight

Humatiel wrote: »

I for one would rather have them work on new content then spend half of their remaining time trying to fix old content.

hrothbern

Humatiel wrote: »

show previous quotes

hrothbern wrote: »

Humatiel wrote: »

From a purely logistical standpoint I can find no fault with your logic, or your variety of potential (yes solutions with the potential to actually work) answers. To be quite frank though with all the crap ZoS has put us through I like that I am overpowered as ****, I highly doubt (at this point in time) I would still be playing if I wasn't.

Don't get me wrong I believe that 1.5 was the best time to play and that it provided a good solid "lets work together" mentality, but if we look at the larger picture ZoS clearly doesn't want that. We receive nothing remotely challenging that can occupy our time, overland npc are so pitiful I have afked before and come back and not been dead, vet pledges are laughable, I solo nonvet pledges. Hodor is managing 4 man Sanctum HM and nobody seems to care from the devs standpoint, we have vr5 characters completing AA and Hel Ra because yes.

Much like there will never be a roll back to the difficulty the game started with, their will also never be anything so drastic as the changes you're proposing because players simply won't stay for it. ZoS has been very transparent that game difficulty will always come second to game lore and to that end the more extreme of any environment will always be easier then it should be. So yes, I do enjoy being overpowered because it allows me the flexibility to both play casually and complete content that I want to with no obligatory sense of dedication needed. This game is not Eve, we are not scaling WoW style raids, at no point are guildmasters requiring players to buy($$) gear (not going to mention the game).

Elder Scrolls Online: Casuals Unlimited.

If we play in the weekend tennis, for fun and fitness, we are most likely casual tennis players enjoying it.
If we look on the television to a Grand Slam tournament, we see awfull good tennis from profi's.

It is both tennis.

I think that in base concept ESO can also handle both
But it will take quite a while before that is under control.

After a point though we must ask, is this worth the effort. Let's assume that ESO lasts another 5 years before the inevitable decline to P2W, alliances forming due to lack of playerbase etc. in two years virtually every sandbox update has been geared entirely toward a more dps intensive playerbase, so we can safely assume that we're looking at two years to return to a more balanced one.

so two years to regain the "beaten path", but in those two years it means an overhaul of all current combat mechanics, mob health, caps, and most important any released and future releases of DLC. at that point the game has turned the "hump" of it's life (per 5 remaining) and reasonably only has a few good years left before the decline. I for one would rather have them work on new content then spend half of their remaining time trying to fix old content.

nice reading @Humatiel ,

True the product life cycle, the maturity cycle, is there.
The moment of the hump always a discussion and opaque. Finance and OPS pulling on both sides.

I for one as well, prefer also new content, every quarter, steady as a rock, to be secured for me as player directly and for the health of ESO as a whole.
Never jeopardise business continuity that pays the bills. Overhauling the game may not interfere with content DLC's, but must take place with a good budget in a steady program.

I speculate now, but...
I think that the big overhaul started by Matt Firor when he took over from Paul Sage in June last year is still in progress, and it will take some time before we can see the bigger picture. Yes... the game has changed and will continue to do so... and that will not happen without some bloodshed for the customer profiles and the products. But good for the revenue and continuity of the game.

To the point of difficulty:
ZOS did solve the battle levelling (adjusting your character to the surrounding monster level) !!!
I guess that adjusting for the CP's you have in a similar generic way should also be practical possible.
I guess that even a by the player chosen difficulty level in a similar generic way should also be practical possible.
So from casual in a profi mood to a profi in a casual mood is possible.

Once that is implemented, this game could have a very long life cycle
Catering a wide variety of kinds of players including their often changing choices what they like most.
A wide range for: do what you want to do and do it how you want.

Humatiel

Merlight wrote: »

show previous quotes

Humatiel wrote: »

I for one would rather have them work on new content then spend half of their remaining time trying to fix old content.

It's an mmo, almost by definition everything we do on here fits that picture.

@hrothbern

To be clear we do not disagree on an overhaul should this game have any designs of lasting more than a few years. Eventually the power creep will reach proportions where pledges will be soloed as a general rule of thumb. To sum up our difference of view though I suspect it boils down to simple trust, I trust that ZoS will not be able to adequately change the games now linear dps race while maintaining its dlc rhythm and fixing old content. Because I accept their inability as fact I play the "short game" so to speak, if I have fun for three years knowing it may end at any point then that's fine with me. That means there really is no "need" to be a collector, make race based meta alts, or put myself through the grind of titles on different characters should I decide I don't want to.

In a more abstract view that very difference in opinion is ZoS first battleground, the trust of their playerbase shouldn't be underestimated and at the end of the day that very trust will ultimately decide if a player stays or not. I digress though and do not wish to turn this into one of those threads.


edit: couldn't resist adding this before ZoS decides they want to weigh in;
"We're looking into it, no ETA"

hrothbern

Humatiel wrote: »

show previous quotes

Merlight wrote: »

Humatiel wrote: »

I for one would rather have them work on new content then spend half of their remaining time trying to fix old content.

It's an mmo, almost by definition everything we do on here fits that picture.

@hrothbern

To be clear we do not disagree on an overhaul should this game have any designs of lasting more than a few years. Eventually the power creep will reach proportions where pledges will be soloed as a general rule of thumb. To sum up our difference of view though I suspect it boils down to simple trust, I trust that ZoS will not be able to adequately change the games now linear dps race while maintaining its dlc rhythm and fixing old content. Because I accept their inability as fact I play the "short game" so to speak, if I have fun for three years knowing it may end at any point then that's fine with me. That means there really is no "need" to be a collector, make race based meta alts, or put myself through the grind of titles on different characters should I decide I don't want to.

In a more abstract view that very difference in opinion is ZoS first battleground, the trust of their playerbase shouldn't be underestimated and at the end of the day that very trust will ultimately decide if a player stays or not. I digress though and do not wish to turn this into one of those threads.


edit: couldn't resist adding this before ZoS decides they want to weigh in;
"We're looking into it, no ETA"

Merlight

Humatiel wrote: »

It's an mmo, almost by definition everything we do on here fits that picture.

It wasn't meant to illustrate what we (as players) do here, but that pumping out new content without fixing core design flaws fits that picture on ZOS side.

Phinix1

DeanTheCat wrote: »

Finally, someone who "gets it!"

I spent literally months after the CP system came out trying to explain why caps were necessary. It is only when the no-life 24/7 OCD grinders started hitting 1000+ CP that ZOS finally realized people really ARE that psychotic and did the right thing.

What you describe here is 90% of the problem with balance in the game, and I agree with almost everything you said including the proposed solutions. Just a couple corrections:

• Keep Reasonable CP caps instead of lowering bonuses, and tweak the catch-up mechanic if needed. An increase of 51 points with DB sounds like a reasonable increase.
• Make dodge roll, break free, block, etc. use a separate Energy resource and rebalance Magicka vs. Stamina as pure Resource vs. Resource.

Too much of the imbalance between resource classes comes from all the "gimmicks" attempting to balance around one resource double-dipping for offense and defense. This combined with removal of softcaps completely destroyed the concept of a competitive hybrid build.

Emma_Eunjung wrote: »

NO to all of this. What is the point of grinding to progress your toons if that progression is going to be rolled back on a whim?

Change is inevitable. No point sticking with a broken system just because adapting to a 1-time change is hard. Besides, you can't honestly sit there and tell me you would not have build a v16 set if it gave only an 8% power increase instead of 12%, and if you did, no one would believe you. Min-maxers always go for the highest stat even if it is 1% and you well know that.

Emma_Eunjung wrote: »

Furthermore, the "power creep" from the Champion System is a much needed boost to solo-oriented players like me who have been struggling to conquer as much of the group content in the game as possible. The extra power that comes from hundreds of CP offers many players an important alternate path to accomplishing their goals in the game, goals that may not have even been possible before Update 1.6.

Arguing to keep a broken and unsustainable system in place because you have personally set "goals" to solo content designed for grouping isn't really much of an argument. More a proof of the problem.

No offense, but do you think just because you use the corporate self-help positive affirmation buzz word "goal" that you are automatically entitled to unbalance the game to play god?

"I set a 'goal' to be able to solo all trials. This is my goal man don't shart on my goals!"

No.

Emma_Eunjung wrote: »

Finally, I don't share your optimism that ZOS would roll back the nerfs to Bolt Escape or whatever. Those abilities probably need a conceptual overhaul, not a mere tweak or re-balancing. Who knows when (or if) ZOS will get around to overhauling the abilities and combat mechanics.

The two are not mutually exclusive. ZOS can fix the power creep by the methods the OP and others have suggested AND make tweaks to a few "outlier" skills.

Not having faith in someones ability to do the right thing doesn't mean you shouldn't try.

That's just quitter talk. Or, in the context of your previous rationale, an argument to keep the imbalance because you like grinding to god status, balance be damned.

Frawr

Spot on @DeanTheCat.

6 months on and it is all too sadly apparent that they either lack the will or ability to replemeny soft caps or they genuinely see the game in a different way from the 'forum minority'.

The cp system was great on paper. They missed the vital point of applying balance to it: making something weaker by making else something stronger.

Speccing response into damage should have weakened the bonuses from healing or resistance to the point of physically nerf'ing heal and resistance once damage was being capped. This rudimentary system would have balanced people out.


The current cap method is pointless and simply delays the inevitable. Not to mention the fact that a cheese build is possible at 360 points. The rest are a bonus.

There needs to be counter weight in the system. Zenimax why are you so scared of weakening players...