Balancing Updates - small and often, or large and infrequent?

Carbonised

Alright, those of us who watched the last ESO Live noticed that Rich stated that they went for infrequent and larger updates to balance, as opposed to smaller, more frequent incremental patches to deal with these issues. And he argued that we as players prefered it that way, due to not having to deal with more frequent changes to skills or gear.

However, most people on the PTS have argued otherwise, that they prefer smaller incremental patches so as to not swing the balance too much back and forth between extremes with sweeping changes every 3-6 months, and then nothing at all in between that.
Personally I think they are right, and I think most people would rather deal with more frequent balancing patches than what we see on the PTS right now, huge, sweeping changes that drastically change just about everything.

So cast your vote, and let's see if Rich is right or not:

Mojmir

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

It only makes sense,it might not be his decision though.

Browiseth

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

i refuse to believe any right minded player actually wants to wait months on end for essential balance changes. Rich's argument that players prefer slower updates because they don't have to re-gear is ridiculous; what difference does it make? we'll have to deal with the changes sooner or later anyway, and the sheer fact we have to wait so long is the reason players grow too comfortable with broken metagames

TBois

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

I don't think they have the staff to work on small incremental updates and adding content at the same time. They just don't want to say it.

Shad0wfire99

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Making giant, sweeping changes all at once makes zero sense. How they expect to learn anything about how each change impacts the game with all the variables they've introduced is beyond me.

SydneyGrey

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Browiseth wrote: »

i refuse to believe any right minded player actually wants to wait months on end for essential balance changes. Rich's argument that players prefer slower updates because they don't have to re-gear is ridiculous; what difference does it make? we'll have to deal with the changes sooner or later anyway, and the sheer fact we have to wait so long is the reason players grow too comfortable with broken metagames

This. No one likes large changes to their games all at once. Then it's just frustrating as they suddenly destroy a character you've been playing for a long, long time.

Shad0wfire99 wrote: »

Making giant, sweeping changes all at once makes zero sense. How they expect to learn anything about how each change impacts the game with all the variables they've introduced is beyond me.

And this. Big changes will just come with their own lack of balance, which will then later have to be changed again.

sneakymitchell

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

It's not like everyone will be on PTS.

Aimora

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

They seem to have a habit of telling us what we want - then wrapping up in the standard 'it's what the community wanted' line.

idk

While the poll will offer good entertainment value, it does not have the capacity to gain the opinion of the player base, merely those that frequent the forums, choose to look at this thread and then choose to vote.

Regardless, Rich Lambert is less than genuine with his response in ESO Live since Update 13 was a big balance update. Maybe he considers that merely a small tweak. It is not the first time Zos has provided us with highly questionable justification.

Remember pre launch of ESO when Zos said their "vision" was we would get our information from the environment rather than from UI and well, look at what they are adding to the base game now. Buff trackers to track buffs and debuffs on yourself and the target. Humm. Only took them 3 years to abandon that vision.

SleepyTroll

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Who ever votes the top option is a Wrobel/Rich alt lol

D0ntevenL1ft

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Rich has never been right, ever. End of story.

Mashille

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

That is some Percentage difference, lmfao

Turelus

Other.

Large scale changes (like sustain) with large updates.

Small tweaks to values in incrementals.

Poliwrath

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Ya I felt Wrobel and Rich were pretty out of touch when they said players prefer larger/infrequent.

ADarklore

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

I wonder if he means the 'players' in ZOS' office because it means less work for them! Funny how on ESO Live they made such a fuss of people saying they don't play the game, but in reality, how many people really think that ZOS' employees go home and sit for hours playing the game they worked on all day??? Yeah, I thought so. Second, I think it was Rich, over at the German event, admitted that he had never been to Craglorn on the Live server. Play your own game much? Sorry, but in my book, working on in-house servers is not truly 'playing the game' like those of us who have spent thousands of hours on the LIVE server.

DragonBound

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Carbonised wrote: »

Alright, those of us who watched the last ESO Live noticed that Rich stated that they went for infrequent and larger updates to balance, as opposed to smaller, more frequent incremental patches to deal with these issues. And he argued that we as players prefered it that way, due to not having to deal with more frequent changes to skills or gear.

However, most people on the PTS have argued otherwise, that they prefer smaller incremental patches so as to not swing the balance too much back and forth between extremes with sweeping changes every 3-6 months, and then nothing at all in between that.
Personally I think they are right, and I think most people would rather deal with more frequent balancing patches than what we see on the PTS right now, huge, sweeping changes that drastically change just about everything.

So cast your vote, and let's see if Rich is right or not:

This marvel heroes did this for a long time and it was great but if you want a perfect example of to much change to quickly just look their recent change it was huuuge and tons of people did not like it at first.

Carbonised

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

54 out of 55 people so far prefer smaller and more infrequent incremental patches. Please do keep voting. We'd like to show Rich by how great a margin he's wrong in this.

notimetocare

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Sadly, the poll has no midground.
Major changes with major patches, corrections and adjustments as needed.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Shad0wfire99 wrote: »

Making giant, sweeping changes all at once makes zero sense. How they expect to learn anything about how each change impacts the game with all the variables they've introduced is beyond me.

Precisely. They can't possibly learn anything of value when so many variables have changed so dramatically - and the perpetual unbalanced state of the game proves this.

They are applying the WRONG solution, to the WRONG questions, and then wondering why they get the WRONG outcomes.

After watching a handful of recent livestreams I am convinced I wouldn't let Mr Wrobel attempt to balance my kitchen scales if I only had two matching weights, much less a fluid system with as many variables as an MMORPG. The task is quite clearly beyond his capabilities. For the record I think he thinks he is doing the right thing for the right reasons - but in any industry with paying customers it is NOT the intentions that count, but the outcomes.

And a game that has never once in its life even approached anything resembling sustainable balance is manifestly exhibiting the wrong outcomes.

All The Best

Rinmaethodain

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

I voted for "small and frequent" balance changes but as long as ZOS finally decides to drop their idea of "unified PVP and PVE experience" and starts balancing PVE and PVP completely separately https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/4055913 i could handle the "rare and big" balance changes knowing that this time PVP complaints wont ruin my PVE builds.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Browiseth wrote: »

i refuse to believe any right minded player actually wants to wait months on end for essential balance changes. Rich's argument that players prefer slower updates because they don't have to re-gear is ridiculous;

What he is essentially saying there is "Our RNG gear system is utter rubbish, and it impacts our ability to deliver more frequent balance patches, but we are too stubborn/lazy/cheap (delete as applicable) to fix it."

Having to re gear twice a year isn't an issue in gearing systems that DON'T rely on cheap/lazy RNG.

All The Best

Phinix1

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

While the poll will offer good entertainment value, it does not have the capacity to gain the opinion of the player base, merely those that frequent the forums, choose to look at this thread and then choose to vote.

@ZOS_RichLambert is that you?

visionality

There is no right and wrong here, sorry. For minor adapations, small changes on a regular base would ofc be better than months of waiting for something easy to fix.

But I don't see how the huge rebalance Zenimax intends with the next patch could be achieved by a series of smaller steps. First remove cost reduction, and once everybody has a new build adapted to that, reduce regen? And once everybody has cried, rebuilt and adapted to that, change templar abilities? To be followed later by changes to sorc, NB or DK? This would put everybody in a state of permanent insecurity, never knowing whether his build will still work after the little patch next week.

Vaoh

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

We love you Rich, but the response to Morrowind by players of all backgrounds (both casual and hardcore) could better be described as severe backlash. It went badly.

I can see the changes being made on the recent versions of PTS, but a large majority of the playerbase prefers frequent incremental patches. If a build is ruined it by this it was probably because it was OP and needed to be nerfed. Js

pattyLtd

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

I prefer small fixes more often because in my opinion that is what balancing means, finetuning.

Make these huge changes everytime and you can be certain the next big imbalance issue is around the corner.
Of course if a system is broken at its core it could be necessary but i really dont think that is the case here.
To me it feels like changing things for the sake of changing things because aparently that's how MMO's work.

I dont like the upcoming changes and admit my first response was "omg i quit" but i calmed down a bit now and decided i will just wait and see how bad it really is. If it truelly isnt fun anymore i will not buy morrowind and go do something else till the next major unbalance patch goes live

Faulgor

Turelus wrote: »

Other.

Large scale changes (like sustain) with large updates.

Small tweaks to values in incrementals.

Yeah. Why can't we have both?

I want them to make larger, visionary changes and monitor/adjust them frequently.

inf.toniceb17_ESO

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

I would rather change a few skills and\or set pieces once in a while than working my butt off re-leraning the game and re-grinding gear every half a year. Not to mention that it will be easier for ZOS to balance game that way. That's actully my biggest problem with the Morrowind patch and the reason i consider quitting the game. I seriously don't wanna start over yet again. It's gonna be like what..5th or 6th time they change balance so drasticly that you may just decon your gear and start from scratch since launch? For god's sake guys stop doing it.

Marabornwingrion

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Carbonised wrote: »

Alright, those of us who watched the last ESO Live noticed that Rich stated that they went for infrequent and larger updates to balance, as opposed to smaller, more frequent incremental patches to deal with these issues. And he argued that we as players prefered it that way, due to not having to deal with more frequent changes to skills or gear.

However, most people on the PTS have argued otherwise, that they prefer smaller incremental patches so as to not swing the balance too much back and forth between extremes with sweeping changes every 3-6 months, and then nothing at all in between that.
Personally I think they are right, and I think most people would rather deal with more frequent balancing patches than what we see on the PTS right now, huge, sweeping changes that drastically change just about everything.

So cast your vote, and let's see if Rich is right or not:

No idea where he got this info, but I'm sure not from here. 95% prefer small updates.

waterfairy

Neither-
Set it and forget it like Ronco

FloppyTouch

I prefer more frequent, but smaller incremental patches to deal with balancing issues

Doing huge changes like this is no different then raising the gear cap for the fact we have to re build our characters the people so against gear gap increase should be against huge balance updates.

BigBragg

I'll take it when they iron out the kinks and don't break more than they fix. Whether it is slow and steady or in lump sums.