The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Maintenance for the week of April 29:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 29
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 29
ZOS vision of balance doesn't add up.
-
playsforfun✭✭✭✭they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.2 -
Jamascus✭✭✭✭playsforfun wrote: »they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.
That's fine if their plan makes sense and is logically consistent. But saying you want all classes to be able to perform all roles and then add yet another class specific healing line contradicts that.2 -
playsforfun✭✭✭✭playsforfun wrote: »they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.
That's fine if their plan makes sense and is logically consistent. But saying you want all classes to be able to perform all roles and then add yet another class specific healing line contradicts that.
yeah i totally agree it's wrong to make overpowered classes to sell dlc/expansions5 -
STEVIL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭playsforfun wrote: »they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.
That's fine if their plan makes sense and is logically consistent. But saying you want all classes to be able to perform all roles and then add yet another class specific healing line contradicts that.
There is nothing contradictory or at conflict between having some classes with dedicated healing skill lines (others not) and the design goal of having all classes being able to perform all roles.
As they stated yesterday - perform all roles does (sic adequately) not mean equally.
If all classes with the right build and the right gear and the right specs can be a good enough healer or dps or tank for all the normal" content, be good enough at some of those roles (but not all those roles for hard mode leaderboard stuff) and kind of mix it up in the vet level content - that is mission accomplished IMO.
Right now it seems they can.Proudly skooma free while talks-when-drunk is in mandatory public housing.
YFMV Your Fun May Vary.
First Law of Nerf-o-Dynamics
"The good way I used to get good kills *with good skill* was good but the way others kill me now is bad."0 -
Jamascus✭✭✭✭playsforfun wrote: »they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.
That's fine if their plan makes sense and is logically consistent. But saying you want all classes to be able to perform all roles and then add yet another class specific healing line contradicts that.
There is nothing contradictory or at conflict between having some classes with dedicated healing skill lines (others not) and the design goal of having all classes being able to perform all roles.
As they stated yesterday - perform all roles does (sic adequately) not mean equally.
If all classes with the right build and the right gear and the right specs can be a good enough healer or dps or tank for all the normal" content, be good enough at some of those roles (but not all those roles for hard mode leaderboard stuff) and kind of mix it up in the vet level content - that is mission accomplished IMO.
Right now it seems they can.
Then what's the point of having classes?0 -
Vizier✭✭✭✭✭
✭It's bad enough to have FOTM meta roles swarming the servers, even with the 4 classes and limited action bars. Can you even imagine the copy and paste we'd be seeing if they actually implemented the traditional Elder Scrolls character parameters? This game would be boring as hell. An MMO requires some variation and limitation as compared to the single player versions of this franchise. Much as I would like the freedom to do that. Much as I appreciate that in the SP games, I think this would harm ESO irreparably.2 -
STEVIL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭playsforfun wrote: »they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.
That's fine if their plan makes sense and is logically consistent. But saying you want all classes to be able to perform all roles and then add yet another class specific healing line contradicts that.
There is nothing contradictory or at conflict between having some classes with dedicated healing skill lines (others not) and the design goal of having all classes being able to perform all roles.
As they stated yesterday - perform all roles does (sic adequately) not mean equally.
If all classes with the right build and the right gear and the right specs can be a good enough healer or dps or tank for all the normal" content, be good enough at some of those roles (but not all those roles for hard mode leaderboard stuff) and kind of mix it up in the vet level content - that is mission accomplished IMO.
Right now it seems they can.
Then what's the point of having classes?
Well the debate between class and freeform is as old as the first rpg if not earlier - and here i mean pen and paper not pixels. its been hashed over many times and each has its merits to some and its deficits to others. there is no "right" or "wrong" answer to it.
Saying "whats the point of classes" is like saying "whats the point of weapon skill lines" or "whats the point of mage skill lines" or "whats the point of races"... those pre-fab packages mostly help define the world and give it flavor.
Some of the benefits for classes CAN include but do not always depending on implementation and content:
Easier start-up and guidance especially for the newcomer or casual.- Immersions and explanation about the world - if the classes incorporate elements of it.
- Can balance at "the unit level" (class) instead of at "the element level" (skill) which opens up balance possibilities and combo not necessarily available if classes (or some other "unit" grouping) is used. A given "skill" for instance can be superior on one class than its counterpart on another if the rest of the class features help to balance things out.
these are just a few. Note however that there are tons of stops along the railway between the "solid rigid class" system and the "no class all elemental" system and so its often as not a bit of both - like ESO is.
Some people would see a completely "skill based" system where you could pick any skill and any passive as "just a class system in disguise" seeing "skill" as just a smaller class and wanting to be able to build a coldFX-ranged-defile-pull-to-me instead of being limited to what the skills have pre-packaged together.
But basically what you have is the largest scale "unit" is your character.
within that you can select a number of sub-units: class-weapon-attributes-guild-lines etc and then within those packages you construct your final avatar...
In ESO they have chosen it seems to make almost all the content and roles manageable by any class in any role... but still leave some "better performance" levels for the higher end vet and hard mode leaderscore based chases - seems fair to me.
Edited by STEVIL on April 29, 2017 8:53PMProudly skooma free while talks-when-drunk is in mandatory public housing.
YFMV Your Fun May Vary.
First Law of Nerf-o-Dynamics
"The good way I used to get good kills *with good skill* was good but the way others kill me now is bad."1 -
WalksonGraves✭✭✭✭✭
✭Personally I'd like access to all skills just to increase the build possibilities. Things have gotten stale.0 -
Jamascus✭✭✭✭playsforfun wrote: »they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.
That's fine if their plan makes sense and is logically consistent. But saying you want all classes to be able to perform all roles and then add yet another class specific healing line contradicts that.
There is nothing contradictory or at conflict between having some classes with dedicated healing skill lines (others not) and the design goal of having all classes being able to perform all roles.
As they stated yesterday - perform all roles does (sic adequately) not mean equally.
If all classes with the right build and the right gear and the right specs can be a good enough healer or dps or tank for all the normal" content, be good enough at some of those roles (but not all those roles for hard mode leaderboard stuff) and kind of mix it up in the vet level content - that is mission accomplished IMO.
Right now it seems they can.
Then what's the point of having classes?
Well the debate between class and freeform is as old as the first rpg if not earlier - and here i mean pen and paper not pixels. its been hashed over many times and each has its merits to some and its deficits to others. there is no "right" or "wrong" answer to it.
Saying "whats the point of classes" is like saying "whats the point of weapon skill lines" or "whats the point of mage skill lines" or "whats the point of races"... those pre-fab packages mostly help define the world and give it flavor.
Some of the benefits for classes CAN include but do not always depending on implementation and content:
Easier start-up and guidance especially for the newcomer or casual.- Immersions and explanation about the world - if the classes incorporate elements of it.
- Can balance at "the unit level" (class) instead of at "the element level" (skill) which opens up balance possibilities and combo not necessarily available if classes (or some other "unit" grouping) is used. A given "skill" for instance can be superior on one class than its counterpart on another if the rest of the class features help to balance things out.
these are just a few. Note however that there are tons of stops along the railway between the "solid rigid class" system and the "no class all elemental" system and so its often as not a bit of both - like ESO is.
Some people would see a completely "skill based" system where you could pick any skill and any passive as "just a class system in disguise" seeing "skill" as just a smaller class and wanting to be able to build a coldFX-ranged-defile-pull-to-me instead of being limited to what the skills have pre-packaged together.
But basically what you have is the largest scale "unit" is your character.
within that you can select a number of sub-units: class-weapon-attributes-guild-lines etc and then within those packages you construct your final avatar...
In ESO they have chosen it seems to make almost all the content and roles manageable by any class in any role... but still leave some "better performance" levels for the higher end vet and hard mode leaderscore based chases - seems fair to me.
This just leads to everyone being mediocre at everything and no one great at anything. The class unit is not needed if you can perform all roles adequately for the majority of the content with the abilities available to everyone, i.e weapon, mages guild etc. They want every player from the shiniest noob to the most salty grizzled vet to be able to perform all roles, ok. Then get rid of class restrictions and make all skills available to everyone(which I'm not advocating). Then they will be closer to the balance they envision.0 -
max_only✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Kiralyn2000 wrote: »
don't you know anything???? Duuuuuhhhh everyone knows nightblades are equal dps to sorcerers, templars and dks. Nightblades are Zos' favorite class dontcha know!
Edited by max_only on April 30, 2017 7:02AM#FiteForYourRite Bosmer = Stealth
#OppositeResourceSiphoningAttacks
|| CP 1000+ || PC/NA || GUILDS: LWH; IA; CH; XA
""All gods' creatures (you lot) are equal when covered in A1 sauce"" -- Old Bosmeri Wisdom0 -
Mojmir✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ComboBreaker88 wrote: »
So if you give everyone all options there are no options?Edited by Mojmir on April 29, 2017 9:58PM0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »ComboBreaker88 wrote: »
Not necessarily. Not everyone is into min-maxing. Not even the majority of people are.
However, allowing more freedom (even an illusion of freedom) is always a harder design choice. And to have all skill lines available to everyone, the devs must face unpredictable outcomes everyday. In a MMO you do want to avoid most of the extreme outcomes (in single player games it does not matter a player can one-shot the end game boss, though).
So the most reasonable choice is to limit players in some fashion, reducing the design difficulty. Well, and they can justify it by thinking "MMO players love to have classes (and a dumbed down RPG system)."
An illusion of freedom is not freedom. Using the term illusion itself acknowledges it and makes everything else you said questionable at best.
Further, you comment about min-maxing is debatable. Considering all the threads that pop up about someone not being able to raid with a group or guild because they did not use a meta build is really about them not producing the DPS the group wants. Basically, eliminating classes, for the few that want such a thing, would hem more people into specific builds so they can do what they want.
More importantly, those the spread between those who choose to not play any of the top builds or anything close would increase pushing the more casual player further down the ladder. All in the name of an Illusion of Freedom.
Yeah, this was the problem with The Secret World. On paper, (or more accurately, when you looked at the skill wheel), it looked like there were a lot of different ways to perform any role. Once you actually started getting into midgame content, however, it would start completely invalidating approaches as a way to ratchet up the "difficulty."
For example, the game looked like it had six or seven different DPS approaches, ranging from spike damage, to self buffs, to crit builds (technically, TSW had two separate crit mechanics), DoTs, channels (which, in theory, would roll the dice on any proc build constantly)... but, almost none of them were actually useful most of the time. And a few, I'm looking at the channels mechanic, specifically did not work as described, due to changes between beta and launch that never made it onto the tooltips. There was even an entire deck (think, class) built around the channel mechanics which never worked after launch at all, because the abilities it was supposed to use had been fundamentally broken by those nerfs (the Paladin, if you're wondering).
That said, it is possible to design an MMO with a lot of different approaches to each role. Not even false choices that don't function, but legitimate alternate options.0 -
ADarklore✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It certainly feels this way. I think it's more of a problem with their logic. Their foundation is flawed so everything built on top of it will be unstable.
Well, you know what they say about foundations built on sand!CP: 1965 ** ESO+ Gold Road ** ~~ Stamina Arcanist ~~ Magicka Warden ~~ Magicka Templar ~~ ***** Strictly a solo PvE quester *****0 -
STEVIL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭playsforfun wrote: »they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.
That's fine if their plan makes sense and is logically consistent. But saying you want all classes to be able to perform all roles and then add yet another class specific healing line contradicts that.
There is nothing contradictory or at conflict between having some classes with dedicated healing skill lines (others not) and the design goal of having all classes being able to perform all roles.
As they stated yesterday - perform all roles does (sic adequately) not mean equally.
If all classes with the right build and the right gear and the right specs can be a good enough healer or dps or tank for all the normal" content, be good enough at some of those roles (but not all those roles for hard mode leaderboard stuff) and kind of mix it up in the vet level content - that is mission accomplished IMO.
Right now it seems they can.
Then what's the point of having classes?
Well the debate between class and freeform is as old as the first rpg if not earlier - and here i mean pen and paper not pixels. its been hashed over many times and each has its merits to some and its deficits to others. there is no "right" or "wrong" answer to it.
Saying "whats the point of classes" is like saying "whats the point of weapon skill lines" or "whats the point of mage skill lines" or "whats the point of races"... those pre-fab packages mostly help define the world and give it flavor.
Some of the benefits for classes CAN include but do not always depending on implementation and content:
Easier start-up and guidance especially for the newcomer or casual.- Immersions and explanation about the world - if the classes incorporate elements of it.
- Can balance at "the unit level" (class) instead of at "the element level" (skill) which opens up balance possibilities and combo not necessarily available if classes (or some other "unit" grouping) is used. A given "skill" for instance can be superior on one class than its counterpart on another if the rest of the class features help to balance things out.
these are just a few. Note however that there are tons of stops along the railway between the "solid rigid class" system and the "no class all elemental" system and so its often as not a bit of both - like ESO is.
Some people would see a completely "skill based" system where you could pick any skill and any passive as "just a class system in disguise" seeing "skill" as just a smaller class and wanting to be able to build a coldFX-ranged-defile-pull-to-me instead of being limited to what the skills have pre-packaged together.
But basically what you have is the largest scale "unit" is your character.
within that you can select a number of sub-units: class-weapon-attributes-guild-lines etc and then within those packages you construct your final avatar...
In ESO they have chosen it seems to make almost all the content and roles manageable by any class in any role... but still leave some "better performance" levels for the higher end vet and hard mode leaderscore based chases - seems fair to me.
This just leads to everyone being mediocre at everything and no one great at anything. The class unit is not needed if you can perform all roles adequately for the majority of the content with the abilities available to everyone, i.e weapon, mages guild etc. They want every player from the shiniest noob to the most salty grizzled vet to be able to perform all roles, ok. Then get rid of class restrictions and make all skills available to everyone(which I'm not advocating). Then they will be closer to the balance they envision.
@Jamascus
You quote my post but i cant see that you read it as much as just used *** to launch an anti-class minifesto.
As i said the debates between those who see classes as good here or those who see classes as bad there and all those between is not one I see with a right or a wrong - it is a matter of flavor, preference or belief as much as anything more concrete.
Anybody reading my post would see i did not list "making people greater at..." in my list of benefits classes can provide.
Whether there are classes or are not classes is irrelevant to that aspect or for that matter whatever you use to define great.
Whether there are classes or not has nothing to do with whether every player can adequately perform every role.
You seem to be set on arguing that straw man.
I will admit to being curious... if we do not need "class units" which package together a variety of skills and passives... why do you feel we need "weapon units" which do the same or the various guild units? Why do we need the alliance war unit with its two skills lines and passives?
Why do we need skill lines for that matter?
Drawing the line between "packaged units are good" and "packaged units are bad" at specifically classes seems to be a ppoint you believe is correct but i dont see why? isn't keeping rally out of the hands of dw users as bad as keeping BoL out of the hands of stamsorcs?
Proudly skooma free while talks-when-drunk is in mandatory public housing.
YFMV Your Fun May Vary.
First Law of Nerf-o-Dynamics
"The good way I used to get good kills *with good skill* was good but the way others kill me now is bad."0 -
STEVIL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭ComboBreaker88 wrote: »
So if you give everyone all options there are no options?
"Everyone that is driven by the same build objectives" makes the answer to that more or less - yes.
Since "everyone" is not driven by the same objections the answer to the abbreviated question you provided is "no".
Some folks might run grothdar on their stamsorc cuz the like the fire animation ignoring that fire is in a different cp tree than most of their attacks.
Limitations and challenges drive diversity just as much as number of options does.
right now, the way set counts work means that sets like lich, clever alchemist, witchman and others which work out well for "only 11 slots cuz i use staves or bows or 2h wpns on my main bar" are more frequently seen on those characters than
are the .ones more suited to 12pc builds for dw or sword-shield.
As long as they contunue with the practice of "mostly inward facing (narcissistic) build elements" where its almost all about "what are my characters numbers" and then taking those numbers practically everywhere there will always be metas that stand out and get over-used to the detriment of diversity.
The more limited the scope is, the smaller and smaller the size scope of the content where any given build is "meta" the more diversity you will see.
Partly that happens now on some levels - due to restrictions that occur within certain "units" and the difference in challenges - its why 2h/bow outperforms dw/bow in popularity in pvp but not in group/trial dps role. one of those has burst and utility more crucial to success while the other focuses more tightly on sustain-damage.
If the scopes of any given build were even less - so that your gear/trait/attribute etc would be better in some pledges than others for instance - there would be even more diversity seen.
Proudly skooma free while talks-when-drunk is in mandatory public housing.
YFMV Your Fun May Vary.
First Law of Nerf-o-Dynamics
"The good way I used to get good kills *with good skill* was good but the way others kill me now is bad."1 -
STEVIL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭
"if they are massive enough they will hold the sand together?"
was that it?Proudly skooma free while talks-when-drunk is in mandatory public housing.
YFMV Your Fun May Vary.
First Law of Nerf-o-Dynamics
"The good way I used to get good kills *with good skill* was good but the way others kill me now is bad."0 -
jaye63✭✭✭✭Warden, if it has heals, should be a self or spot heal. Templar is the doctor that heals you. Warden should be the paramedic til the doctor gets there
0 -
Doctordarkspawn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭starkerealm wrote: »Lord_Dexter wrote: »All classes should never fit all role,
This is just killing gameplay variety!
Not necessarily.
If every class is approaching each role in the same way, and is just a pallet swap, then yeah, that eats variety. However, if each class has different tools to approach each role, two classes can still fulfill the same role.
For example, you can have a class that tanks by healing off the damage. You can have a tank that avoids taking damage (EDIT: literally, dodging out of the way). You can have a tank that generates temporary health to act as a shield for incoming attacks. You can have a tank that gains additional damage mitigation as the fight progresses, meaning they take less damage from each hit. You can have a retaliation tank, who still takes damage, but then deals it right back into the enemy. You can have a minion tank, where the actual tanking is done by their summons, and they support them. You can have a control tank, that locks up enemy movement or attacks, and keeps their enemies out of reach.
There are a lot of ways to tank. Just like there are a lot of ways to heal, or DPS. So each class could fill all three roles in radically different ways, maintaining gameplay variety. Problem is, ESO doesn't really do that... but it could.
It could, but lets be brutally honest, the designers are not compitent to make that happen.
Not with PVP being a continuous drain on balance, at the very least.1 -
Jamascus✭✭✭✭
I think we have a disconnect. I agree, you did not say that a benefit to classes is it makes people greater at x, y or z. I said very specifically that I am not advocating for class removal(see the bold and italicized above). What I said was that if they did get rid of classes and put all abilities in a pool for everyone to use that it would get them closer to their vision for the game. I happen to disagree with their vision but was willing to see if they could achieve it. They've had since launch and have yet to succeed and I think it's time for them to give up that vision. I don't have a problem with classes or some classes being better at certain aspects than others. Some agree, some don't. And I definitely don't want dw users to have rally or stamsorcs to have breath of life. I hope that provides clarification.playsforfun wrote: »they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.
That's fine if their plan makes sense and is logically consistent. But saying you want all classes to be able to perform all roles and then add yet another class specific healing line contradicts that.
There is nothing contradictory or at conflict between having some classes with dedicated healing skill lines (others not) and the design goal of having all classes being able to perform all roles.
As they stated yesterday - perform all roles does (sic adequately) not mean equally.
If all classes with the right build and the right gear and the right specs can be a good enough healer or dps or tank for all the normal" content, be good enough at some of those roles (but not all those roles for hard mode leaderboard stuff) and kind of mix it up in the vet level content - that is mission accomplished IMO.
Right now it seems they can.
Then what's the point of having classes?
Well the debate between class and freeform is as old as the first rpg if not earlier - and here i mean pen and paper not pixels. its been hashed over many times and each has its merits to some and its deficits to others. there is no "right" or "wrong" answer to it.
Saying "whats the point of classes" is like saying "whats the point of weapon skill lines" or "whats the point of mage skill lines" or "whats the point of races"... those pre-fab packages mostly help define the world and give it flavor.
Some of the benefits for classes CAN include but do not always depending on implementation and content:
Easier start-up and guidance especially for the newcomer or casual.- Immersions and explanation about the world - if the classes incorporate elements of it.
- Can balance at "the unit level" (class) instead of at "the element level" (skill) which opens up balance possibilities and combo not necessarily available if classes (or some other "unit" grouping) is used. A given "skill" for instance can be superior on one class than its counterpart on another if the rest of the class features help to balance things out.
these are just a few. Note however that there are tons of stops along the railway between the "solid rigid class" system and the "no class all elemental" system and so its often as not a bit of both - like ESO is.
Some people would see a completely "skill based" system where you could pick any skill and any passive as "just a class system in disguise" seeing "skill" as just a smaller class and wanting to be able to build a coldFX-ranged-defile-pull-to-me instead of being limited to what the skills have pre-packaged together.
But basically what you have is the largest scale "unit" is your character.
within that you can select a number of sub-units: class-weapon-attributes-guild-lines etc and then within those packages you construct your final avatar...
In ESO they have chosen it seems to make almost all the content and roles manageable by any class in any role... but still leave some "better performance" levels for the higher end vet and hard mode leaderscore based chases - seems fair to me.
This just leads to everyone being mediocre at everything and no one great at anything. The class unit is not needed if you can perform all roles adequately for the majority of the content with the abilities available to everyone, i.e weapon, mages guild etc. They want every player from the shiniest noob to the most salty grizzled vet to be able to perform all roles, ok. Then get rid of class restrictions and make all skills available to everyone(which I'm not advocating). Then they will be closer to the balance they envision.
@Jamascus
You quote my post but i cant see that you read it as much as just used *** to launch an anti-class minifesto.
As i said the debates between those who see classes as good here or those who see classes as bad there and all those between is not one I see with a right or a wrong - it is a matter of flavor, preference or belief as much as anything more concrete.
Anybody reading my post would see i did not list "making people greater at..." in my list of benefits classes can provide.
Whether there are classes or are not classes is irrelevant to that aspect or for that matter whatever you use to define great.
Whether there are classes or not has nothing to do with whether every player can adequately perform every role.
You seem to be set on arguing that straw man.
I will admit to being curious... if we do not need "class units" which package together a variety of skills and passives... why do you feel we need "weapon units" which do the same or the various guild units? Why do we need the alliance war unit with its two skills lines and passives?
Why do we need skill lines for that matter?
Drawing the line between "packaged units are good" and "packaged units are bad" at specifically classes seems to be a ppoint you believe is correct but i dont see why? isn't keeping rally out of the hands of dw users as bad as keeping BoL out of the hands of stamsorcs?
0 -
Sausage✭✭✭✭✭
✭If you want balance go play Rift, its truly perfectly balanced, but guess what, its extremely boring too. I simply dont get it why players want it every damn year and it turns out to be boring. Balance is excuse for bad players when they suck. Lastly, balance does not determine whether this game succeed or fails.Edited by Sausage on April 30, 2017 4:03AM0 -
STEVIL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭
I think we have a disconnect. I agree, you did not say that a benefit to classes is it makes people greater at x, y or z. I said very specifically that I am not advocating for class removal(see the bold and italicized above). What I said was that if they did get rid of classes and put all abilities in a pool for everyone to use that it would get them closer to their vision for the game. I happen to disagree with their vision but was willing to see if they could achieve it. They've had since launch and have yet to succeed and I think it's time for them to give up that vision. I don't have a problem with classes or some classes being better at certain aspects than others. Some agree, some don't. And I definitely don't want dw users to have rally or stamsorcs to have breath of life. I hope that provides clarification.playsforfun wrote: »they'll never be balance if they keep implementing things then going back on them because people crying on the forums that they're being brought level with the other classes, if they've got a plan they should go with it and stick to it.
That's fine if their plan makes sense and is logically consistent. But saying you want all classes to be able to perform all roles and then add yet another class specific healing line contradicts that.
There is nothing contradictory or at conflict between having some classes with dedicated healing skill lines (others not) and the design goal of having all classes being able to perform all roles.
As they stated yesterday - perform all roles does (sic adequately) not mean equally.
If all classes with the right build and the right gear and the right specs can be a good enough healer or dps or tank for all the normal" content, be good enough at some of those roles (but not all those roles for hard mode leaderboard stuff) and kind of mix it up in the vet level content - that is mission accomplished IMO.
Right now it seems they can.
Then what's the point of having classes?
Well the debate between class and freeform is as old as the first rpg if not earlier - and here i mean pen and paper not pixels. its been hashed over many times and each has its merits to some and its deficits to others. there is no "right" or "wrong" answer to it.
Saying "whats the point of classes" is like saying "whats the point of weapon skill lines" or "whats the point of mage skill lines" or "whats the point of races"... those pre-fab packages mostly help define the world and give it flavor.
Some of the benefits for classes CAN include but do not always depending on implementation and content:
Easier start-up and guidance especially for the newcomer or casual.- Immersions and explanation about the world - if the classes incorporate elements of it.
- Can balance at "the unit level" (class) instead of at "the element level" (skill) which opens up balance possibilities and combo not necessarily available if classes (or some other "unit" grouping) is used. A given "skill" for instance can be superior on one class than its counterpart on another if the rest of the class features help to balance things out.
these are just a few. Note however that there are tons of stops along the railway between the "solid rigid class" system and the "no class all elemental" system and so its often as not a bit of both - like ESO is.
Some people would see a completely "skill based" system where you could pick any skill and any passive as "just a class system in disguise" seeing "skill" as just a smaller class and wanting to be able to build a coldFX-ranged-defile-pull-to-me instead of being limited to what the skills have pre-packaged together.
But basically what you have is the largest scale "unit" is your character.
within that you can select a number of sub-units: class-weapon-attributes-guild-lines etc and then within those packages you construct your final avatar...
In ESO they have chosen it seems to make almost all the content and roles manageable by any class in any role... but still leave some "better performance" levels for the higher end vet and hard mode leaderscore based chases - seems fair to me.
This just leads to everyone being mediocre at everything and no one great at anything. The class unit is not needed if you can perform all roles adequately for the majority of the content with the abilities available to everyone, i.e weapon, mages guild etc. They want every player from the shiniest noob to the most salty grizzled vet to be able to perform all roles, ok. Then get rid of class restrictions and make all skills available to everyone(which I'm not advocating). Then they will be closer to the balance they envision.
@Jamascus
You quote my post but i cant see that you read it as much as just used *** to launch an anti-class minifesto.
As i said the debates between those who see classes as good here or those who see classes as bad there and all those between is not one I see with a right or a wrong - it is a matter of flavor, preference or belief as much as anything more concrete.
Anybody reading my post would see i did not list "making people greater at..." in my list of benefits classes can provide.
Whether there are classes or are not classes is irrelevant to that aspect or for that matter whatever you use to define great.
Whether there are classes or not has nothing to do with whether every player can adequately perform every role.
You seem to be set on arguing that straw man.
I will admit to being curious... if we do not need "class units" which package together a variety of skills and passives... why do you feel we need "weapon units" which do the same or the various guild units? Why do we need the alliance war unit with its two skills lines and passives?
Why do we need skill lines for that matter?
Drawing the line between "packaged units are good" and "packaged units are bad" at specifically classes seems to be a ppoint you believe is correct but i dont see why? isn't keeping rally out of the hands of dw users as bad as keeping BoL out of the hands of stamsorcs?
i tend to disagree with the bold but that is because there is more than just that one piece of "vision" that makes up their "vison for the game."
i have done tons of games with intricate character building, simple character building, very large units (classes fairly restrictive) down to very "elemental" building (super-detail crunchy everything from scratch) and what i have seen if the floor to ceiling is much greater the more elemental the system is.
The more elemental, the more experience and knowledge of the builds and the minutia of interactions plays into things.
So, yes, if for instance every character built every skill from a base pool of sub-ability slots and there were no classes, no weapons, no guilds and everything was micro-detail from the ground up... the potential for any character to meet any role if they can just spec/respec for it is maximized - but at the same time you will lose flavor and have a vastly higher ceiling to floor.
On the other hand, and here is the rub, if "classes" are each able to do each role to adequate levels but certain class-race-weapon packages are just that much better at certain roles - the same can be said.
if i know a templar m,agica with abc gear and xyz skills is "duh best healer" then i can build that if i want and the fact that its a class isn't a problem.
Would it be as good of a healr as it could be if i could cherrry pick skills from everywhere - nope - but those are two different games and best is best in a game not best conceivable in any game.
NOTE: i realize you did not advocate for this low an elemental level - you seem fine with weapons and such as "classes" and somehow dont think they hold folks back... even though tossing in rally and vigor into a "resto" templar might well help since it gives them a stamina heal source as well.
To me its always trade-offs... have done enough by now to see the plusses and minuses of freeform and heavy classed and everything in between.Proudly skooma free while talks-when-drunk is in mandatory public housing.
YFMV Your Fun May Vary.
First Law of Nerf-o-Dynamics
"The good way I used to get good kills *with good skill* was good but the way others kill me now is bad."1 -
Galwylin✭✭✭✭✭Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »If the goal is any class should be able to heal as well as a templar then why can't a templar do other roles as well as another class? There doesn't seem to be this rush to make them better tanks or dps so why go after their healing role? So far, they've just nerfed their healing role but left them subpar in the others. Have I missed where they tank as well as a dragonknight or damage as well as a sorcerer. And nightblades, what happen there?
@Galwylin
Templars are solid tanks and do decent DPS. A Templar has tanked multiple clears of the hardest PvE content in the game and Templars are still seen in very solid core teams clearing the same content.
I'm not saying its impossible. All classes have something that makes them shine. Templars have had their star dimmed and have gained nothing. They didn't add anything to make them better at tanking or dps. They've already realized they were too harsh from the first patch to the new one. The question is why were they going so hard after them. They do the same thing with nightblades. They don't like ganking (even though they put it in the game) but instead of giving nightblades new tools to not to have to rely on ganking so much. All the while ignoring that they were doing the most harm to them in PvE.
Balance should be a two way street. You take something away. Give something back. I don't main a templar. I just hate seeing classes singled out for the benefit of another class. Nerfs should be about benefiting the game not benefiting other classes.2 -
bg22✭✭✭✭✭
✭I've said that since beta... just get rid of classes. Make all abilities available to everyone. Solves ALL balance issues and allows for endless amounts of diversity.
Not true, it would cause all stam dps to be one thing, all magicka dps to be one thing, all healers to be one thing, and maybe a few kinds of tanks. Balance would be there, but diversity would go out the window. People will find the best spec for each setup (stam, mag, and healing), and instead of 8 different dps specs, one for each focus on each class, we would have 2 dps specs.
So this isn't exactly true right as I type this? It absolutely is, and always will be.
Right now, even with classes, there is 1 best Stam solo target DPS build, 1 best Stam AoE build, 1 best Mag AoE DPS build, etc. etc.
The only difference now is you have to have a different character to play either role. That's not a bad thing, but it doesn't fit the projection that is "ZOS's idea".
0 -
bg22✭✭✭✭✭
✭It's bad enough to have FOTM meta roles swarming the servers, even with the 4 classes and limited action bars. Can you even imagine the copy and paste we'd be seeing if they actually implemented the traditional Elder Scrolls character parameters? This game would be boring as hell. An MMO requires some variation and limitation as compared to the single player versions of this franchise. Much as I would like the freedom to do that. Much as I appreciate that in the SP games, I think this would harm ESO irreparably.
Not true... the limitations that you speak of would be kept in check by only having 10 ability slots.0
