PvP needs to be balanced first

BigES

Hear me out first.

PvP is simply more difficult to balance than PvE. There are more variables. Players fighting other players means there are a significant amount of interactions happening simultaneously. Passives, skills, CP, gear... it becomes a cluster. Its understandable why ZoS struggles.

PvP imbalance happens (often) when changes are made in the name of PvE damage rotations, resources, and survivability.

The solution to these imbalances in PvP is to then nerf one class compared to another. Then Jimmy the Templar gets on the forums, complains, slanders ZoS', everyone cheers, and nothing really becomes of it.

Lets just image for a second that ZoS manages to balance PvP, and it completely throws PvE out of whack. I think we all agree that's a bad thing. So what solutions do we have?

Nerf Rakhatt. Buff the Warrior. Adjust timers and mechanics. Adjust things from the E side, not the P. Sorc damage is low? Make the mobs take more lightning damage. Whatever.

Because guess what? Jimmy the Templar gets pissed, and stops giving you money. But if you nerf Rakhatt, he isn't exactly going to come on the forums and complain about it. "ZOMG I WAS KILLING SO MANY KIDS IN MY THRONE ROOM AND YOU TOOK MY BEST SKILL AWAY!"

colig

What specific fixes do NPCs need right now to balance the classes?

BigES

colig wrote: »

What specific fixes do NPCs need right now to balance the classes?

Adjustments need to be made to make stamina builds more desirable in competitive trials. You could make the mobs more susceptible to physical damage, for example. Or maybe bleeds.

If ZoS does end up removing the CP system, instead of scraping it, they could use it as a vessel to balance PvE content by giving players perks against mobs only.

NightbladeMechanics

You can't control players. Players will exploit whatever means they have at their disposal to win.

Therefore, you balance player characters, abilities, gear, etc around PvP first.

Then you balance PvE mob encounters around what you get out of that.

It really is simple, just time consuming. That's why ZOS won't do it.

WhiteMage

Well you're right that PvP should be balanced first, but it's not that PvE is easier to balance than PvP. Every change affects PvP in two ways: people are on the giving and the receiving end of it. PvE never has to deal with the recieving end of changes and mobs don't talk nor complain when players are OP. If you balance everything from both sides then you know what you have is good, and if PvE needs adjustment you can do that through the mobs.

PvE isn't easier to balance than PvP though, and unlike with player classes, where you want things to be distinct and differentiated, you WANT a high degree of homogenization in PvE monsters. The whole thing is further complicated by the different paradigms between PvP and PvE. In PvP you need a certain degree of self-sufficiency, while in PvE it is more advantageous to fulfill a role. Then when you want to have a "seamless transition" or whatever between the two, you either end up with skills that do too many things or you have multiple different sets of skills, some that fill a PvE role while others fill a PvPer's needs, such that you just have the illusion of a seamless transition (or whatever ZOS calls it) just because you are allowed to use either in the wrong situations. For example: mist form. For all intents and purposes, this is a PvP skill because there is almost no real reason to use this skill outside of that situation. Now look at wall of elements; this is a PvE skill, a staple for DDs, but impractical is PvE due to player mobility. Can you use both in the wrong setting? Sure, but you are not drawing out its full potential by using it, and you are not performing to your full potential if you give it a slot on your bar there.

Play the way you want, from a certain perspective, is just the developers giving you permission to fail and encouraging you for doing so. And you know what? I think I've moved a little ways away from the topic I started on so I'll end it here.

wildbear247

My 2 cents...ZOS should balance PvP and PvE separately. Yeah I know they're​ trying to avoid that (although they have made exceptions). I think separating PvP and PvE environments becomes especially important when one side calls for nerfs that could significantly affect gameplay for the other side. From what I've seen on these forums usually the requests for nerfs originate mostly from the PvP side (I say this as someone that mostly plays PvP these days). Nerfs and changes that might be justified and healthy for the PvP side of ESO could seriously derail builds and play-styles that PvE'rs have invested hundreds of hours into...which I don't think is good or healthy for the game (unless it's a fix to game breaking bugs or something similar, but arbitrary power nerfs don't count IMO). Consider a couple of examples:

1) Eliminating the crit on proc sets. For PvP I think that was a healthy change, but I don't think it was needed for PvE. No PvE player ever cried out that he wanted to do less damage to the AI, especially if he just dumped 50 hours wading through RNG muck to grind for that shiny new set, only to have said set nerfed because it was over-performing in PvP.
2) Consider an ability like the Templar's Radiant Destruction. ZOS nerfed its damage in both PvE & PvP, but reducing it's range just in PvP arguably might have better addressed the concerns of PvP'rs. The Nightblade's Ambush & Sorc's Negate are examples of ZOS changing a skill to behave differently in PvP & PvE...so it's possible to satisfy one group of players without disrupting another.