Maintenance for the week of October 12:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – October 12, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) – 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC)
• Xbox One: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – October 14, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) – 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®4: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – October 14, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) – 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – October 12, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) – 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC)
• Xbox One: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – October 14, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) – 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®4: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – October 14, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) – 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
The Markarth DLC and Update 28 base game patch are now available to test on the PTS! Read the full patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/categories/pts/
Only about the sustain nerfs...
Zyrudin
✭✭✭✭
... and not about the Templar, DK and NB changes.
I have been playing since launch (with a small break in between). It became clear even early on that ZOS developers then (that, as many know, are not the same as now) were getting unexpected gameplay feedback results from their community. Examples are their statement that it would take a while for the first Emperor to be crowned in Cyrodiil and it took only a few hours and also that group dungeons would require four players and a few adventuring build tweakers managed to solo them early on. I mean, just think about this small detail: in the early game, there was a weapon trait called "Weighted" that would reduce the channel time for heavy attacks. It was eventually replaced with "Decisive", but just think about why that trait was in there at launch.
There have been many back and forths in the direction decision-making process (even more visible since the developers changed, of course), but it seems clear that they have now realized that there is too much going on in player gameplay and playstyle that is not intended and that shouldn't be possible. They tried to give everyone a chance with the removal of soft caps and then the introduction of CP and the removal of the need for VR grinding, but realized now that instead of actually making it available to everyone, they were handing the game over to the meta students.
And note, I am not talking about individual class changes, as mentioned before, but only about the general sustain nerfs.
So, instead of the game "opening up" it had the opposite effect. Builds became more strict in the players' review of their peers and the "have to have" sets and traits became the norm, with so many showing frustration for an RNG system that, whether considered fair or unfair was always taken out of perspective. The initial idea for the non-crafted sets were for you to be happy to get even one, whichever the trait, because obtaining them was damned hard back in the early days. If, in the future you got pieces with better traits, then you would replace them. However, with the accessibility that the removal of soft caps and CP provided (not to mention the difficulty nerf too), acquiring these sets became easier and the way they were intended to be used (and the real reason for the RNG system - again whether we agree with it or not) was lost.
They have finally realized, with Homestead especially, that these kinds of unintended gameplay and builds and meta could not go on the way it was (there will always be meta, regardless, of course) and that this was the best timing they could find to indirectly tell players that the game is supposed to be played within certain boundaries and premises.
Now, of course it can be argued that the content difficulty may need to be adjusted again after these changes - sure. Nevertheless, I think ZOS is trying to tell their community that, despite the ingeniousness behind it, they do want players to find out how the game was designed to be played and why it has the features it has. Will it work the way they intend? I can't say, nor can any of us, but we can speculate.
Do not take this dissertation of mine as being in favor or against any of these changes, but as a reflection on them from someone who has witnessed the ebb and flow of how ESO was directed since 2014.
I have been playing since launch (with a small break in between). It became clear even early on that ZOS developers then (that, as many know, are not the same as now) were getting unexpected gameplay feedback results from their community. Examples are their statement that it would take a while for the first Emperor to be crowned in Cyrodiil and it took only a few hours and also that group dungeons would require four players and a few adventuring build tweakers managed to solo them early on. I mean, just think about this small detail: in the early game, there was a weapon trait called "Weighted" that would reduce the channel time for heavy attacks. It was eventually replaced with "Decisive", but just think about why that trait was in there at launch.
There have been many back and forths in the direction decision-making process (even more visible since the developers changed, of course), but it seems clear that they have now realized that there is too much going on in player gameplay and playstyle that is not intended and that shouldn't be possible. They tried to give everyone a chance with the removal of soft caps and then the introduction of CP and the removal of the need for VR grinding, but realized now that instead of actually making it available to everyone, they were handing the game over to the meta students.
And note, I am not talking about individual class changes, as mentioned before, but only about the general sustain nerfs.
So, instead of the game "opening up" it had the opposite effect. Builds became more strict in the players' review of their peers and the "have to have" sets and traits became the norm, with so many showing frustration for an RNG system that, whether considered fair or unfair was always taken out of perspective. The initial idea for the non-crafted sets were for you to be happy to get even one, whichever the trait, because obtaining them was damned hard back in the early days. If, in the future you got pieces with better traits, then you would replace them. However, with the accessibility that the removal of soft caps and CP provided (not to mention the difficulty nerf too), acquiring these sets became easier and the way they were intended to be used (and the real reason for the RNG system - again whether we agree with it or not) was lost.
They have finally realized, with Homestead especially, that these kinds of unintended gameplay and builds and meta could not go on the way it was (there will always be meta, regardless, of course) and that this was the best timing they could find to indirectly tell players that the game is supposed to be played within certain boundaries and premises.
Now, of course it can be argued that the content difficulty may need to be adjusted again after these changes - sure. Nevertheless, I think ZOS is trying to tell their community that, despite the ingeniousness behind it, they do want players to find out how the game was designed to be played and why it has the features it has. Will it work the way they intend? I can't say, nor can any of us, but we can speculate.
Do not take this dissertation of mine as being in favor or against any of these changes, but as a reflection on them from someone who has witnessed the ebb and flow of how ESO was directed since 2014.
