Veteran Maelstrom Arena Weapons in DB

byrom101b16_ESO

Roymachine wrote: »

byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »

The best way to deal with this would be to award 1 Gold vMA Token for being on the leaderboard and have 15 tokens allow you to buy any one weapon from a shopping list of all possible combinations of weapon and trait in Gold from the little guy at the entrance.

Leave the RNG as it is going to be.

What you are suggesting is being nearly 4 months on the leaderboard and only then getting the weapon you want.

Barrier to entry should not be 'Did I get lucky this run?' It should be a show of accomplishment. It should be "I am wearing this gear because I was able to accomplish the tasks required to get it." People getting multiple weapons they wanted in <10 runs should not be abnormal. There shouldn't be people running it several hundred times and not getting what they want and then quitting the game because of it. The loot table is too large for this sort of thing.

You clearly didn't read the last line of my post - which makes you answering it with derision kinda embarrassing no?

My tokens would be IN ADDITION to the RNG as it is proposed - for the chance to get the weapon you want every time WHILST getting tokens that eventually guarantee it if you are skilled enough.

Artis

Decado wrote: »

Btw 10% of the population is tiny an extra 10% DPS is huge as someone mentioned if all the DPS do an extra 10% that's almost a whole persons DPS on top

Humanities major detected. 10% is 10% everywhere. It has no dimensions and shows the value of something RELATIVE to something else. It is the measure of huge/small and 10% is huge or small in the same degree relative to anything you take 10% of.

hedna123b14_ESO

Artis wrote: »

Decado wrote: »

Btw 10% of the population is tiny an extra 10% DPS is huge as someone mentioned if all the DPS do an extra 10% that's almost a whole persons DPS on top

Humanities major detected. 10% is 10% everywhere. It has no dimensions and shows the value of something RELATIVE to something else. It is the measure of huge/small and 10% is huge or small in the same degree relative to anything you take 10% of.

Artis you are essentially claiming that context doesn't matter...but that's a ridiculous claim to make since it definitely matters...

Artis

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

Decado wrote: »

Btw 10% of the population is tiny an extra 10% DPS is huge as someone mentioned if all the DPS do an extra 10% that's almost a whole persons DPS on top

Humanities major detected. 10% is 10% everywhere. It has no dimensions and shows the value of something RELATIVE to something else. It is the measure of huge/small and 10% is huge or small in the same degree relative to anything you take 10% of.

Artis you are essentially claiming that context doesn't matter...but that's a ridiculous claim to make since it definitely matters...

Not in this case. 10% is 10%. It's the same fraction of different numbers. The relative difference stays the same in any case and for any example where you want to take 10%. Percentage is all about relative difference/ratios and that's why and how it was introduced.

Context matters for many things. But percentage's meaning is invariable.

hedna123b14_ESO

Artis wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

Decado wrote: »

Btw 10% of the population is tiny an extra 10% DPS is huge as someone mentioned if all the DPS do an extra 10% that's almost a whole persons DPS on top

Humanities major detected. 10% is 10% everywhere. It has no dimensions and shows the value of something RELATIVE to something else. It is the measure of huge/small and 10% is huge or small in the same degree relative to anything you take 10% of.

Artis you are essentially claiming that context doesn't matter...but that's a ridiculous claim to make since it definitely matters...

Not in this case. 10% is 10%. It's the same fraction of different numbers. The relative difference stays the same in any case and for any example where you want to take 10%. Percentage is all about relative difference/ratios and that's why and how it was introduced.

Context matters for many things. But percentage's meaning is invariable.

I gave a you a cancer drug and sandwich analogy that uses logic to disprove your statement, you have yet to refute it. Please provide a logical proof of your argument. Here is another one for you. 10% of a barrel of honey is poisoned. You wouldn't have any of that honey, because the percentage is HIGH enough that there is a high chance you will die. On the other hand if a Barrell contains 10% green apples and 90% red apples then there is a SMALL percentage of apples that are green. To say that context doesn't matter is insulting to logic itself.

Artis

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

Decado wrote: »

Btw 10% of the population is tiny an extra 10% DPS is huge as someone mentioned if all the DPS do an extra 10% that's almost a whole persons DPS on top

Humanities major detected. 10% is 10% everywhere. It has no dimensions and shows the value of something RELATIVE to something else. It is the measure of huge/small and 10% is huge or small in the same degree relative to anything you take 10% of.

Artis you are essentially claiming that context doesn't matter...but that's a ridiculous claim to make since it definitely matters...

Not in this case. 10% is 10%. It's the same fraction of different numbers. The relative difference stays the same in any case and for any example where you want to take 10%. Percentage is all about relative difference/ratios and that's why and how it was introduced.

Context matters for many things. But percentage's meaning is invariable.

I gave a you a cancer drug and sandwich analogy that uses logic to disprove your statement, you have yet to refute it. Please provide a logical proof of your argument. Here is another one for you. 10% of a barrel of honey is poisoned. You wouldn't have any of that honey, because the percentage is HIGH enough that there is a high chance you will die. On the other hand if a Barrell contains 10% green apples and 90% red apples then there is a SMALL percentage of apples that are green. To say that context doesn't matter is insulting to logic itself.

But no, it doesn't disprove anything and I thought I commented on it then. If not here is how it works. If you eat 90% of sandwich long term and you need 100% then you will starve to death as well as if you didn't take enough of a cancer drug.

Now is your example disproving anything though? In both cases you have 90% of what you need and 10% of what you don't need. In both cases it's 10%. You're trying to interpret it differently, but in both cases it's either small or huge, not huge in one and small in the other one. If green apples are poisonous to somebody - then he can die too. But it's not the difference between huge and small, in the end. It's just the contextual difference (apples vs honey), not the difference in numbers.

Classic mistake here is trying to compare absolute values. 10% of a higher number is greater than 10% of a smaller number if you compare absolute values.. That's why you don't. Because it won't make sense if you're talking about different pairs of numbers.

In which pair of numbers numbers are closer to each other? 100 and 95 or 10 and 6?

Dunkmeister

WInterborn Jerkin and a winterborn hat from the final chests of the two vet runs I just finished. Hey, the hat was even well-fitted!

So worth it.... err wait.

Marthor_Banana

excited about the new patch!

hedna123b14_ESO

Artis wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

Decado wrote: »

Btw 10% of the population is tiny an extra 10% DPS is huge as someone mentioned if all the DPS do an extra 10% that's almost a whole persons DPS on top

Humanities major detected. 10% is 10% everywhere. It has no dimensions and shows the value of something RELATIVE to something else. It is the measure of huge/small and 10% is huge or small in the same degree relative to anything you take 10% of.

Artis you are essentially claiming that context doesn't matter...but that's a ridiculous claim to make since it definitely matters...

Not in this case. 10% is 10%. It's the same fraction of different numbers. The relative difference stays the same in any case and for any example where you want to take 10%. Percentage is all about relative difference/ratios and that's why and how it was introduced.

Context matters for many things. But percentage's meaning is invariable.

I gave a you a cancer drug and sandwich analogy that uses logic to disprove your statement, you have yet to refute it. Please provide a logical proof of your argument. Here is another one for you. 10% of a barrel of honey is poisoned. You wouldn't have any of that honey, because the percentage is HIGH enough that there is a high chance you will die. On the other hand if a Barrell contains 10% green apples and 90% red apples then there is a SMALL percentage of apples that are green. To say that context doesn't matter is insulting to logic itself.

But no, it doesn't disprove anything and I thought I commented on it then. If not here is how it works. If you eat 90% of sandwich long term and you need 100% then you will starve to death as well as if you didn't take enough of a cancer drug.

Now is your example disproving anything though? In both cases you have 90% of what you need and 10% of what you don't need. In both cases it's 10%. You're trying to interpret it differently, but in both cases it's either small or huge, not huge in one and small in the other one. If green apples are poisonous to somebody - then he can die too. But it's not the difference between huge and small, in the end. It's just the contextual difference (apples vs honey), not the difference in numbers.

Classic mistake here is trying to compare absolute values. 10% of a higher number is greater than 10% of a smaller number if you compare absolute values.. That's why you don't. Because it won't make sense if you're talking about different pairs of numbers.

In which pair of numbers numbers are closer to each other? 100 and 95 or 10 and 6?

1. Your explanation of the sandwich is perfect. you wont starve if you eat 10% less of a sandwich, but you will most surely die if the cancer drug is not administered in the proper dosage. For example if you eat 90% of sandwich first and then 2 days later eat 10% it will actually be better for you. having 90% of the cancer treatment done might not eradicate cancer completely and the 10% applied 2 days later wont be enough since they will have spread by then. So your point is refuted yet again.

2. Im not following you...you are agreeing with me then, that context matters? Correct the number 10 is the same but in one instance it is interpreted as small enough not to matter and in the other instance as BIG enough to matter. So while the number itself is static its importance matters. Let me give you a more clear example from the game. If you are a healer tasked only with healing for a trial, whether you heal 10% more or less DOES NOT MATTER, becuase your only job is to make sure no one dies and provide support. However if a DPS does less damage than the fight is longer, the boss has more chances to kill you and it creates an additional strain on everyone....context matters.
3. You are missing the point man, its not a question of whether the number is different in different contexts, its a question whether that number is significant, and the significance of something IS dependent on context...

Artis

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

1. Your explanation of the sandwich is perfect. you wont starve if you eat 10% less of a sandwich, but you will most surely die if the cancer drug is not administered in the proper dosage. For example if you eat 90% of sandwich first and then 2 days later eat 10% it will actually be better for you. having 90% of the cancer treatment done might not eradicate cancer completely and the 10% applied 2 days later wont be enough since they will have spread by then. So your point is refuted yet again.

2. Im not following you...you are agreeing with me then, that context matters? Correct the number 10 is the same but in one instance it is interpreted as small enough not to matter and in the other instance as BIG enough to matter. So while the number itself is static its importance matters. Let me give you a more clear example from the game. If you are a healer tasked only with healing for a trial, whether you heal 10% more or less DOES NOT MATTER, becuase your only job is to make sure no one dies and provide support. However if a DPS does less damage than the fight is longer, the boss has more chances to kill you and it creates an additional strain on everyone....context matters.
3. You are missing the point man, its not a question of whether the number is different in different contexts, its a question whether that number is significant, and the significance of something IS dependent on context...

1. But you will starve to death if you eat 90% of the food you need to survive. So if all you eat is sandwich and you eat 90% instead of 100% - then you bet you will starve. Or are you saying you want starve because you also eat other things? Well then if you take 90% of a cancer drugs but you also take other cancer drugs you won't die as well.

2.No, I am trying to explain that you are trying to compare absolute value differences instead of percentages. 10-6=4<5=100-95. But what you need to compare is their difference RELATIVE to them. And then you'll see that clearly 95 is closer to a 100, than 6 to 10. Or 5 to 10. Yeah, that might be better. 10-5=100-95=5. But 5 is 50% of 10 whereas it's only 5% of 100.

And that's what you're trying to do in healer-dps example again. Basically, the logic of what you're saying is the following. Healers need to have X hps, but now they are healing Y hps and if they heal 0.9Y hps it won't matter. Well it only won't matter if 0.9Y hps is greater or equal than X. If not - your raiders will die. ANd you'll need to rez etc, so your dps will suffer.

3. 10% is 10% in every context. What's significant is the absolute value of this 10% and only if you say it's significant. But in fact, 10% is either huge everywhere or not. In this case - no. 10% is not huge. It's an acceptable error for most experiments they do in schools

Makkir

zerosingularity wrote: »

But you lose Nerineth/Kena 2pc, which is a big loss in most scenarios.

Now if it were buffed or modded in some fashion to be more reliable, it might be interesting to try out.

Maybe not in PvP

hedna123b14_ESO

Artis wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

1. Your explanation of the sandwich is perfect. you wont starve if you eat 10% less of a sandwich, but you will most surely die if the cancer drug is not administered in the proper dosage. For example if you eat 90% of sandwich first and then 2 days later eat 10% it will actually be better for you. having 90% of the cancer treatment done might not eradicate cancer completely and the 10% applied 2 days later wont be enough since they will have spread by then. So your point is refuted yet again.

2. Im not following you...you are agreeing with me then, that context matters? Correct the number 10 is the same but in one instance it is interpreted as small enough not to matter and in the other instance as BIG enough to matter. So while the number itself is static its importance matters. Let me give you a more clear example from the game. If you are a healer tasked only with healing for a trial, whether you heal 10% more or less DOES NOT MATTER, becuase your only job is to make sure no one dies and provide support. However if a DPS does less damage than the fight is longer, the boss has more chances to kill you and it creates an additional strain on everyone....context matters.
3. You are missing the point man, its not a question of whether the number is different in different contexts, its a question whether that number is significant, and the significance of something IS dependent on context...

1. But you will starve to death if you eat 90% of the food you need to survive. So if all you eat is sandwich and you eat 90% instead of 100% - then you bet you will starve. Or are you saying you want starve because you also eat other things? Well then if you take 90% of a cancer drugs but you also take other cancer drugs you won't die as well.

2.No, I am trying to explain that you are trying to compare absolute value differences instead of percentages. 10-6=4<5=100-95. But what you need to compare is their difference RELATIVE to them. And then you'll see that clearly 95 is closer to a 100, than 6 to 10. Or 5 to 10. Yeah, that might be better. 10-5=100-95=5. But 5 is 50% of 10 whereas it's only 5% of 100.

And that's what you're trying to do in healer-dps example again. Basically, the logic of what you're saying is the following. Healers need to have X hps, but now they are healing Y hps and if they heal 0.9Y hps it won't matter. Well it only won't matter if 0.9Y hps is greater or equal than X. If not - your raiders will die. ANd you'll need to rez etc, so your dps will suffer.

3. 10% is 10% in every context. What's significant is the absolute value of this 10% and only if you say it's significant. But in fact, 10% is either huge everywhere or not. In this case - no. 10% is not huge. It's an acceptable error for most experiments they do in schools

1. If only 10% of the population is clearing content that is very small. If a boss goes down faster its a big deal for those competing for top spots so it matter more, not surre how much clearer I can make my point man.
2. The only thing I am comparing is the importance of a number which varies depending on the context. You can look at it the way you presented it, but that complicates something that is simple to understand. Context matter in EVERY case.
3. What you are saying regarding my healing example is correct, so you can understand that 10% less healing wont matter as long as everyone is alive, while 110% dps matters a lot because it impacts scores, speed of battle AND stress on everyone in the group.
4. The number 10 doesn't change by context you are correct. Its significance DOES change depending on context. 10% as i have stated prior can mean a lot or a little depending on what the number is related to....

Ajaxduo

Anyone ran vmsa on pts? I'm wondering, do the weapons drop in all traits now? or is it only nirnhoned that has been added?

LegendaryArcher

Ajaxduo wrote: »

Anyone ran vmsa on pts? I'm wondering, do the weapons drop in all traits now? or is it only nirnhoned that has been added?

@Ajaxduo sure, there you go. A little more quitting motivation for those of us refusing ZOS money over frustration:



Aaaaand back to Black Desert. Hope more will follow.
Can't state this enough. There are actual games out there with better graphics and less lag that reward you for skill and time investment instead of punishing you for it.

Ajaxduo

LegendaryArcher wrote: »

Ajaxduo wrote: »

Anyone ran vmsa on pts? I'm wondering, do the weapons drop in all traits now? or is it only nirnhoned that has been added?

@Ajaxduo sure, there you go. A little more quitting motivation for those of us refusing ZOS money over frustration:



Aaaaand back to Black Desert. Hope more will follow.
Can't state this enough. There are actual games out there with better graphics and less lag that reward you for skill and time investment instead of punishing you for it.

Ouch that sucks, sorry for wasting your time. Hopefully we can get a Dev to clarify if all traits are added to the loot table or only nirnhoned. @ZOS_GinaBruno ?

Artis

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

1. If only 10% of the population is clearing content that is very small. If a boss goes down faster its a big deal for those competing for top spots so it matter more, not surre how much clearer I can make my point man.
2. The only thing I am comparing is the importance of a number which varies depending on the context. You can look at it the way you presented it, but that complicates something that is simple to understand. Context matter in EVERY case.
3. What you are saying regarding my healing example is correct, so you can understand that 10% less healing wont matter as long as everyone is alive, while 110% dps matters a lot because it impacts scores, speed of battle AND stress on everyone in the group.
4. The number 10 doesn't change by context you are correct. Its significance DOES change depending on context. 10% as i have stated prior can mean a lot or a little depending on what the number is related to....

1. And once again, you're trying to compare absolute values in a way. It's a completely different matter if you think it matter or not. If 10% is not huge somewhere, it's not huge anywhere else. I understand that you want to maximize your dps, but I want you to understand that you're trying to talk about math emotionally. Math doesn't know emotions lol. Also, other people competing for top spots are in the same conditions. If you really really want that 1% dps - keep farming, like they do/did
2. See above. You're saying that 100 meters is greater than 20 Kelvins. It's not the way it works. Talking about ratios you compare relative differences. If anything, talk about how such and such flat value of dps is important. But I showed you that when you're talking about dps, 10% won't make or break anything. They just let you finish stuff faster. I never argued with that. Now, should they change the system just for 1% of the players competing for the top spot? If 10% completing vma is small, then 1% is even smaller and can be neglected.
3. Of course it's correct, it's math and logic If there's anything I'm somewhat good at .... But see, you underestimate healing. You don't care about 10% only because you overheal at least 10%. In the end, 10% is still 10%. It matters pretty much the same in the big picture. But once you have enough survivability, yes, you need to maximize dps. I never argued with that. I'm arguing with your contextual magnitude of percentages.
4. You're a little confused. 10% is 10%, it's not just about the number, it's also about the meaning of %. 10% is not huge no matter the context. It's low double-digits so it's fairly small. It's a completely different question that you might WANT something more or less. Like you want more than 10% people to complete vma, but you want less than 10% difference of current dps and maximum possible dps. But the thing is, others can want the opposite.

I'll give you this perspective:
The faster vMoL raiders get gear, the less chances I have to even see that trial, because I'm getting behind with every new person getting his weapon. So do I want completely random so I at least have a chance to not fall behind in gear, or do I want for them to be able to farm even faster than they already do? Or if I'm in a weaker trial group, my group becomes weaker in comparison if a stronger group can increase dps/gear up even faster than they already do (which is faster than my group). Take a guess

5. If you're saying 10% completing vma is small, why don't you count how many % complete vMOL? Like really, it's a shame for you to complain, when most players can't even get into vmol. Changing the system just so that 20-30 players can compete with each other? Tusk that. It's less than even 1% of the playerbase. You are already in 99%+ percentile, so I really think you ask for too much. You only care about your own position in the leaderboard, not about competitiveness overall for everyone. And sure, you will get what you want sooner or later. They are already pretty much giving you a guarantee that you loot a weapon. Enjoy. But is it really that good for all of us?

p.s. I have a feeling that vma will be nerfed in DB anyway. They said somewhere it's balanced for 350 cp, but in DB everything VR16 will just become CP160. So idk...

hedna123b14_ESO

Artis wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

1. If only 10% of the population is clearing content that is very small. If a boss goes down faster its a big deal for those competing for top spots so it matter more, not surre how much clearer I can make my point man.
2. The only thing I am comparing is the importance of a number which varies depending on the context. You can look at it the way you presented it, but that complicates something that is simple to understand. Context matter in EVERY case.
3. What you are saying regarding my healing example is correct, so you can understand that 10% less healing wont matter as long as everyone is alive, while 110% dps matters a lot because it impacts scores, speed of battle AND stress on everyone in the group.
4. The number 10 doesn't change by context you are correct. Its significance DOES change depending on context. 10% as i have stated prior can mean a lot or a little depending on what the number is related to....

1. And once again, you're trying to compare absolute values in a way. It's a completely different matter if you think it matter or not. If 10% is not huge somewhere, it's not huge anywhere else. I understand that you want to maximize your dps, but I want you to understand that you're trying to talk about math emotionally. Math doesn't know emotions lol. Also, other people competing for top spots are in the same conditions. If you really really want that 1% dps - keep farming, like they do/did
2. See above. You're saying that 100 meters is greater than 20 Kelvins. It's not the way it works. Talking about ratios you compare relative differences. If anything, talk about how such and such flat value of dps is important. But I showed you that when you're talking about dps, 10% won't make or break anything. They just let you finish stuff faster. I never argued with that. Now, should they change the system just for 1% of the players competing for the top spot? If 10% completing vma is small, then 1% is even smaller and can be neglected.
3. Of course it's correct, it's math and logic If there's anything I'm somewhat good at .... But see, you underestimate healing. You don't care about 10% only because you overheal at least 10%. In the end, 10% is still 10%. It matters pretty much the same in the big picture. But once you have enough survivability, yes, you need to maximize dps. I never argued with that. I'm arguing with your contextual magnitude of percentages.
4. You're a little confused. 10% is 10%, it's not just about the number, it's also about the meaning of %. 10% is not huge no matter the context. It's low double-digits so it's fairly small. It's a completely different question that you might WANT something more or less. Like you want more than 10% people to complete vma, but you want less than 10% difference of current dps and maximum possible dps. But the thing is, others can want the opposite.

I'll give you this perspective:
The faster vMoL raiders get gear, the less chances I have to even see that trial, because I'm getting behind with every new person getting his weapon. So do I want completely random so I at least have a chance to not fall behind in gear, or do I want for them to be able to farm even faster than they already do? Or if I'm in a weaker trial group, my group becomes weaker in comparison if a stronger group can increase dps/gear up even faster than they already do (which is faster than my group). Take a guess

5. If you're saying 10% completing vma is small, why don't you count how many % complete vMOL? Like really, it's a shame for you to complain, when most players can't even get into vmol. Changing the system just so that 20-30 players can compete with each other? Tusk that. It's less than even 1% of the playerbase. You are already in 99%+ percentile, so I really think you ask for too much. You only care about your own position in the leaderboard, not about competitiveness overall for everyone. And sure, you will get what you want sooner or later. They are already pretty much giving you a guarantee that you loot a weapon. Enjoy. But is it really that good for all of us?

p.s. I have a feeling that vma will be nerfed in DB anyway. They said somewhere it's balanced for 350 cp, but in DB everything VR16 will just become CP160. So idk...

1. Context matters, everyone in *** doesnt make it good.
2. 10% wont make or break anything but more dps = betterr score so more dps even 1% is huge
3. Context matters yet again
4. 10% is 10 %, but can mean different things in different CONTEXTS. 10% is relative. Your definition of small and big is also relative to your opinion;) For someone that doesn't run trials competitively 10% dps increase may be small, but to others its big.
5. If people get their gear from the trial they will still run it not for gear but for score.
6. VMoL is new...takes time to learn...the arena has been out for 6 months. I care only for myself? How is that? Im trying to get more people a chance to get their gear. The chances arre not stacked in their favor in terms of rrandomly acquiring theirr weapons. By asking for a fair loot system they are more likely to get it.
7. I hope its nerfed...the most unenjoyable content in the game...

Artis

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

1. Context matters, everyone in *** doesnt make it good.
2. 10% wont make or break anything but more dps = betterr score so more dps even 1% is huge
3. Context matters yet again
4. 10% is 10 %, but can mean different things in different CONTEXTS. 10% is relative. Your definition of small and big is also relative to your opinion;) For someone that doesn't run trials competitively 10% dps increase may be small, but to others its big.
5. If people get their gear from the trial they will still run it not for gear but for score.
6. VMoL is new...takes time to learn...the arena has been out for 6 months. I care only for myself? How is that? Im trying to get more people a chance to get their gear. The chances arre not stacked in their favor in terms of rrandomly acquiring theirr weapons. By asking for a fair loot system they are more likely to get it.
7. I hope its nerfed...the most unenjoyable content in the game...

1. Yes it does, but it doesn't change the meaning or relative value of percentages.
2. It's not huge, you are way too liberal with this word. It's better score. It matters to you, but it's not huge.
3. And yet again, it doesn't do anything with relative values. You are talking about absolute values.
4. 10% is indeed relative. It's relative difference. That is way it will remain 10% in any context. You are talking about what you want and how much. It doesn't change the meaning of 10%.
5. Will they? So do they run vMA not for gear but for score as well? If so, then doesn't matter when exactly they get gear since they keep running it anyway.
6. No, read your posts again. Everywhere you're talking about vmol score and all that. So it's you and about 20-30 other players who are on leaderboards now. The chances are stacked against them if the loot is guaranteed. That means those 20-30 players and those close to them will get gear even faster than others, which won't let strugglers to even start competing.
7. I disagree here. It's the only enjoyable pve content now. Everything else is easy and therefore not fun. It's like farming delves or public dungeons, everything is dumbed down. Like I dont' even care about drop rates of gear and how zos is going to change it, but I do need at least one dungeon for which you need to actually put effort, for which you need to actually prepare crafted pots etc. Can we have ONE dungeon that is not that trivial? p.s. funny, I remember above or in a similar topic you (or more likely code who you came to support) was talking how he doesn't want it to be nerfed.

hedna123b14_ESO

Artis wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

1. Context matters, everyone in *** doesnt make it good.
2. 10% wont make or break anything but more dps = betterr score so more dps even 1% is huge
3. Context matters yet again
4. 10% is 10 %, but can mean different things in different CONTEXTS. 10% is relative. Your definition of small and big is also relative to your opinion;) For someone that doesn't run trials competitively 10% dps increase may be small, but to others its big.
5. If people get their gear from the trial they will still run it not for gear but for score.
6. VMoL is new...takes time to learn...the arena has been out for 6 months. I care only for myself? How is that? Im trying to get more people a chance to get their gear. The chances arre not stacked in their favor in terms of rrandomly acquiring theirr weapons. By asking for a fair loot system they are more likely to get it.
7. I hope its nerfed...the most unenjoyable content in the game...

1. Yes it does, but it doesn't change the meaning or relative value of percentages.
2. It's not huge, you are way too liberal with this word. It's better score. It matters to you, but it's not huge.
3. And yet again, it doesn't do anything with relative values. You are talking about absolute values.
4. 10% is indeed relative. It's relative difference. That is way it will remain 10% in any context. You are talking about what you want and how much. It doesn't change the meaning of 10%.
5. Will they? So do they run vMA not for gear but for score as well? If so, then doesn't matter when exactly they get gear since they keep running it anyway.
6. No, read your posts again. Everywhere you're talking about vmol score and all that. So it's you and about 20-30 other players who are on leaderboards now. The chances are stacked against them if the loot is guaranteed. That means those 20-30 players and those close to them will get gear even faster than others, which won't let strugglers to even start competing.
7. I disagree here. It's the only enjoyable pve content now. Everything else is easy and therefore not fun. It's like farming delves or public dungeons, everything is dumbed down. Like I dont' even care about drop rates of gear and how zos is going to change it, but I do need at least one dungeon for which you need to actually put effort, for which you need to actually prepare crafted pots etc. Can we have ONE dungeon that is not that trivial? p.s. funny, I remember above or in a similar topic you (or more likely code who you came to support) was talking how he doesn't want it to be nerfed.

1. Meaning is relative by definition since it is based on perception and does not have intrinsic value.
2. This statement is your opinion, indicating yet again that it is relative and thus a fluid interpretation.
3. Everything is relative, read Einstein;)
4. I dislike repeating myself, but I am forced to with you over and over. For the 84847 time the number 10 doesn't change, but it's meaning does depending on what it's measuring, since any interpretation of a situation is an opinion and thus is inherently relative.
5. I said trial. Not vMA, there is a huge difference, since the new trial has been acknowledged to be a great piece of content, even though it is difficult to clear. VMA is almost universally hated. Particularly for the replacement of engaging mechanics with high damage and of course that fact that it is solo endgame content in a multi-player game. Theven new trial on the other hand is engaging and very well done.
6. Guaranteed loot will make it easier for every one to get it. Playing the lottery for the item that you want sucks for everyone. Additionally, we already spoke of this. I argued for the RNG to be supplemented with a token system. This would maintain the ability to get lucky as well as add in a guaranteed element.
7. Artis you and a very small percentage of the population enjoy vMA. The people that run multiple clears a day/week only do so for the weapons. There is a literal handful of people that do it because it is fun. There was even a guild message of the day in CSH - the top NA guild, that said:"I know you dislike vMA, but you have to keep grinding for weapons, since they will boost your dps". If that is the message of the day for a top PvE guild, which is supposed to be best of the best. And thus contain people that clear vMA with ease, it is clearly not fun. It is difficult content, but difficult is not always fun. The fun PvE content right now is vMoL. This is very difficult, yet gun content that has interesting mechanics and most importantly it is not solo. Why would endgame content in an MMO, a style you play specifically to play with other people have solo content. I theorize that if VMA would be a duo arena, just this change would be enough to make it fun. Solo in an MMO is terrible and should not exist.

Arethan09

Nifty2g wrote: »

LegendaryArcher wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Maelstrom Arena

• Improved the rewards for Maelstrom Arena so now every level of the Arena is guaranteed to grant a set item.
  • Note: The only exception is the final Arena on Veteran mode, which may still drop a Maelstrom Weapon instead.

Are you kidding me? So the last chest after the 1 - 3h solo arena in an MMO will still drop helmets instead of weapons 19 out of 20 runs? And then a random weapon with a random trait? Referring to this thread concerning the live servers.

The leaderboard isn't being increased either. So most spots for the guaranteed weapons are reserved for those paying real money to cheaters on EpicNPC to run it for them and place them on the leaderboard.

@ZOS_GinaBruno So, how is this a good idea? Usually you encounter design like this only in F2P games.

I wouldnt expect people to pay money, VMA is so easy now that its not even worth real life money, hardly anyone runs it anymore cause they have their loot. Leaderboards are never at 100 for weeklies these days. You have plenty of time to get on the weekly and not have those pesky cheaters beat you

Well i am really not so sure if this is because of it being "easy"... I still have not played through VMA because i just loose the interest in sologameplay without any challenge else than a leaderboard where i would have to invest MUCH to MUCH time to get high and also... how the hell do they consider this content ? Can't stand the VMA after having spent 12h there adjusting playing around aso... it is not fun getting onehitet by some mobs kiting them around... so where is the content here it is just boring and an excuse to show something like content... while they could've actually invested time into a new dungeon, into a new trial or two...

hedna123b14_ESO

@Artis by the way man. I respect you as a player and know that you play well and pull great numbers. That being said, I now run the second CSH raiding group with a friend of mine. I can tell you that if any player in my raid group tells me that raising their DPS by 10% is not a huge deal and is insignificant, they most likely would not be asked back to raid again. This type of thinking promotes mediocrity, and I despise mediocrity.

Tyrannitar

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

@Artis by the way man. I respect you as a player and know that you play well and pull great numbers. That being said, I now run the second CSH raiding group with a friend of mine. I can tell you that if any player in my raid group tells me that raising their DPS by 10% is not a huge deal and is insignificant, they most likely would not be asked back to raid again. This type of thinking promotes mediocrity, and I despise mediocrity.

Also in CSH and I audibly LOL'd at the notion that a 10% dps change is "negligible"

potirondb16_ESO

There's two issue about Vet Maestrom

1. The arena is now a farm spot, don't get me wrong I understand we need to have Something to farm, but having single content reduce to a farming area it's not that great.
2. The arena has been clean from her best set

1. If you want to get Inside the arena and farm it.. good for you, but there should be 3 level of progression Inside your quest toward maestrom weapon.

A) Complete it for the first time (Should at least receive a random maestrom weapon for that)
Complete it in one shot (A potential ranking on the leaderboard for a random yellow one, seem fair)
C) Complete it without using all your soul (That's where farming start/ that's where mecanism needs to be created to avoid the extensive farming)

If you can complete Maestrom with some life you should get a token for all those life, and if you get a 100 Token buy a bag for a specific weapon, undefined traits. DW weapon should cost 75 tokens. That way a player have A a reward for his first completion which for most player is defenitly an exciting moment.

Player who complete it weekly for a shot at the leaderboard also receive an opportunity (even if they can not make it into the leaderboard)

Player who start to farm this arena for real now get incentive to do the best run they can and have the possibility to get a short at a specific MW after 8 runs (minimum). Believing most experience player that are running VmA are usually suffering in between 3 to 8 death per attempt that mean potentially 9 to 20 run for a specific weapon which is only fair.

2. The arena no longer drop Brianthearth or Trinimac set, those set have become exclusive to world boss nowaday. Theese set were quite liked by player as they could drop in ring and necklace which was unabling a 5/5 set perspective so that also have to come back Inside the loot table for VmA if we want to receive altenative drop which are interesting despite Maestom weapon.

Hope they will listen, take care guys

Apherius

all set of maesltrom arena are bad ... ( excepted Permafrost for PVP tank and winter born ... ) ... so ... what is the interest to do maesltrom arena ?

Artis

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

1. Meaning is relative by definition since it is based on perception and does not have intrinsic value.
2. This statement is your opinion, indicating yet again that it is relative and thus a fluid interpretation.
3. Everything is relative, read Einstein;)
4. I dislike repeating myself, but I am forced to with you over and over. For the 84847 time the number 10 doesn't change, but it's meaning does depending on what it's measuring, since any interpretation of a situation is an opinion and thus is inherently relative.
5. I said trial. Not vMA, there is a huge difference, since the new trial has been acknowledged to be a great piece of content, even though it is difficult to clear. VMA is almost universally hated. Particularly for the replacement of engaging mechanics with high damage and of course that fact that it is solo endgame content in a multi-player game. Theven new trial on the other hand is engaging and very well done.
6. Guaranteed loot will make it easier for every one to get it. Playing the lottery for the item that you want sucks for everyone. Additionally, we already spoke of this. I argued for the RNG to be supplemented with a token system. This would maintain the ability to get lucky as well as add in a guaranteed element.
7. Artis you and a very small percentage of the population enjoy vMA. The people that run multiple clears a day/week only do so for the weapons. There is a literal handful of people that do it because it is fun. There was even a guild message of the day in CSH - the top NA guild, that said:"I know you dislike vMA, but you have to keep grinding for weapons, since they will boost your dps". If that is the message of the day for a top PvE guild, which is supposed to be best of the best. And thus contain people that clear vMA with ease, it is clearly not fun. It is difficult content, but difficult is not always fun. The fun PvE content right now is vMoL. This is very difficult, yet gun content that has interesting mechanics and most importantly it is not solo. Why would endgame content in an MMO, a style you play specifically to play with other people have solo content. I theorize that if VMA would be a duo arena, just this change would be enough to make it fun. Solo in an MMO is terrible and should not exist.

1. But there's also mathematical "relative" which is what % is haha
2. Mmm I disagree. I'm trying to explain that % is objective, not subjective. The absolute value of that though..
3. Ugh not again please Can I take a break in game? xD
4. And for the same time - it's what YOU WANT that defines it. Just don't mistake it for huge or small. It's more desirable and undersireable type of situation.
5. Ok, but it's not like the trial is behind the gate of having that weapon. But ok, if that's what you think - at least I get your point. As in vma is necessary evil.
6. It will, but it will just make you and others get it way faster than us. Because you are so much better. But with the current system I can get my staff before you do
7. Oh yeah, I'd so enjoy some duo content. I prefer small-group content or even solo because it's not that easy for me to fit with my English lol Especially when there are 11 people all casually chatting with perfect pronunciation.

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

@Artis by the way man. I respect you as a player and know that you play well and pull great numbers. That being said, I now run the second CSH raiding group with a friend of mine. I can tell you that if any player in my raid group tells me that raising their DPS by 10% is not a huge deal and is insignificant, they most likely would not be asked back to raid again. This type of thinking promotes mediocrity, and I despise mediocrity.

Oh thanks, well you know I respect you too and love playing with you.

I'm just arguing about semantics I guess. I never said it's insignificant though. It's just not HUGE. Or at least if it is huge, then 10% completing vma is huge too. And got it, I'm not welcome to apply haha.
And no, I could say it was negligible if 10% completing vma was negligible. Don't put words in my mouth, another guy lol. Trust me, I'm somewhat deliberate with scientific terms.

KenaPKK

Apherius wrote: »

all set of maesltrom arena are bad ... ( excepted Permafrost for PVP tank and winter born ... ) ... so ... what is the interest to do maesltrom arena ?

Winterborne is bad too imo. I can't think of a single use where it's best in slot, PvE or PvP. It's outshadowed by higher dps sets like Julianos in PvE, and by crafted sets with better traits in PvP.

vMA is valuable for the weapons, of which only a few are actually useful.

hedna123b14_ESO

P

Artis wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

1. Meaning is relative by definition since it is based on perception and does not have intrinsic value.
2. This statement is your opinion, indicating yet again that it is relative and thus a fluid interpretation.
3. Everything is relative, read Einstein;)
4. I dislike repeating myself, but I am forced to with you over and over. For the 84847 time the number 10 doesn't change, but it's meaning does depending on what it's measuring, since any interpretation of a situation is an opinion and thus is inherently relative.
5. I said trial. Not vMA, there is a huge difference, since the new trial has been acknowledged to be a great piece of content, even though it is difficult to clear. VMA is almost universally hated. Particularly for the replacement of engaging mechanics with high damage and of course that fact that it is solo endgame content in a multi-player game. Theven new trial on the other hand is engaging and very well done.
6. Guaranteed loot will make it easier for every one to get it. Playing the lottery for the item that you want sucks for everyone. Additionally, we already spoke of this. I argued for the RNG to be supplemented with a token system. This would maintain the ability to get lucky as well as add in a guaranteed element.
7. Artis you and a very small percentage of the population enjoy vMA. The people that run multiple clears a day/week only do so for the weapons. There is a literal handful of people that do it because it is fun. There was even a guild message of the day in CSH - the top NA guild, that said:"I know you dislike vMA, but you have to keep grinding for weapons, since they will boost your dps". If that is the message of the day for a top PvE guild, which is supposed to be best of the best. And thus contain people that clear vMA with ease, it is clearly not fun. It is difficult content, but difficult is not always fun. The fun PvE content right now is vMoL. This is very difficult, yet gun content that has interesting mechanics and most importantly it is not solo. Why would endgame content in an MMO, a style you play specifically to play with other people have solo content. I theorize that if VMA would be a duo arena, just this change would be enough to make it fun. Solo in an MMO is terrible and should not exist.

1. But there's also mathematical "relative" which is what % is haha
2. Mmm I disagree. I'm trying to explain that % is objective, not subjective. The absolute value of that though..
3. Ugh not again please Can I take a break in game? xD
4. And for the same time - it's what YOU WANT that defines it. Just don't mistake it for huge or small. It's more desirable and undersireable type of situation.
5. Ok, but it's not like the trial is behind the gate of having that weapon. But ok, if that's what you think - at least I get your point. As in vma is necessary evil.
6. It will, but it will just make you and others get it way faster than us. Because you are so much better. But with the current system I can get my staff before you do
7. Oh yeah, I'd so enjoy some duo content. I prefer small-group content or even solo because it's not that easy for me to fit with my English lol Especially when there are 11 people all casually chatting with perfect pronunciation.

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

@Artis by the way man. I respect you as a player and know that you play well and pull great numbers. That being said, I now run the second CSH raiding group with a friend of mine. I can tell you that if any player in my raid group tells me that raising their DPS by 10% is not a huge deal and is insignificant, they most likely would not be asked back to raid again. This type of thinking promotes mediocrity, and I despise mediocrity.

Oh thanks, well you know I respect you too and love playing with you.

I'm just arguing about semantics I guess. I never said it's insignificant though. It's just not HUGE. Or at least if it is huge, then 10% completing vma is huge too. And got it, I'm not welcome to apply haha.
And no, I could say it was negligible if 10% completing vma was negligible. Don't put words in my mouth, another guy lol. Trust me, I'm somewhat deliberate with scientific terms.

1 and 2. I don't think we will ever resolve this argument as I know that by definition calling something big and small does not contain within itself an intrinsic value and is thus subjective depending on the comparison you are making. This conjecture indicates the relativity of every comparative term such as the two above. But this is more of an existential argument now.
3. Lol
4. The meaning is of course my opinion which is what I was arguing in the first place. However in this case therected is a statistical majority of people who happen to share this opinion of mine.
5. The trial can absolutely be completed without vma weapons, but they make it much easier with more dps because bosses die faster, meaning eventually some mechanics disappear or can be bypassed. When I ran with CSH core we were getting him to under 20% by the time the last pad was taken. I bet by now they get him to execute before that last pad, that save a huge amount of time. VMA is definitely a necessary evil.
6. Ok so if let's say I am amazing at vMA and your clears take 5 hours (I know they don't, just anot example), you want to hold me back and essentially diminish the effects of my skill? Sounds dangerously like communism;)
7. I dont know man, I play with you all the time, I think while you do have an accent you are perfectly easy to understand...I wouldn't feel insecure about it. Plus since you pull your weight no one would question you even if you spoke no English considering your skill...

Artis

1.-5. Looks like mutual understanding is achieved. Do refresh what percentage truly means though
6. Guaranteed weapons for everyone is not that far from communism either. Then again, this argument doesn't work on me, I wasn't brainwashed by all that empire of evil nonsense ) I'm not thinking about holding back you personally, it's more about giving others chance not to fall behind too much.
7. Well thanks, I just don't talk that much lately. Not like during vDSA times. Had some people leaving ts in the past, that's why lol.

Anyways, time to log in and run some icp or something. Actually, I haven't set my foot inside vMA for maybe 2 weeks now

hedna123b14_ESO

Artis wrote: »

1.-5. Looks like mutual understanding is achieved. Do refresh what percentage truly means though
6. Guaranteed weapons for everyone is not that far from communism either. Then again, this argument doesn't work on me, I wasn't brainwashed by all that empire of evil nonsense ) I'm not thinking about holding back you personally, it's more about giving others chance not to fall behind too much.
7. Well thanks, I just don't talk that much lately. Not like during vDSA times. Had some people leaving ts in the past, that's why lol.

Anyways, time to log in and run some icp or something. Actually, I haven't set my foot inside vMA for maybe 2 weeks now

I want to hear you talk MOARR!

LegendaryArcher

Just dropping by giving you some more quitting motivation for DB. At least some variety. Last time the ring was Healthy.

If you really want to change something, you have to stop giving ZOS money NOW! We still have 2 weeks. Cancel your ESO Plus, no costumes or pets from Crown Store! Stop supporting this nonsense financially!