The Illusion of Choice

amasuriel

This is mostly a rant, after spending another afternoon theorycrafting to see if the new CP allocations open up any doors.

TL;DR I don't understand why the ZOS devs don't bother with basic math. It makes me sad how easy it would be to add some variety (and sad because it seems like it doesn't happen)

There are a huge number of choices on the surface. 9 Weapon traits. Dozens of sets. Mundus Stones. To a newer or less research oriented player, it seems like a tremendous number of choices.

Traits
Sharpened is still king. You need 50+ erosion to make it viable, even in a raid with Alkosh uptime. Since a gold precise staff is only 7% crit, which is only ~3.5% DPS. At current CP max it's much better to allocate more to other trees and have sharpened. Maybe When CP cap is 1k the math will change on that, but right now it's worse no matter what. Precise is the only trait even in the running, the others are hilariously bad.

Mundus
Thief equates to 7-8% DPS (16%+ crit chance) depending on your number of divines. This is literally double what you get out of Spell / Weapon damage or Stat

Sets
So many sets are sub par because of default choices. There are Templar build that would make use of Soulshine, but it only comes in heavy, and the jewelry only comes with health. The healthy jewelry may not sound like a big deal, but it's 2500 health (useless) vs Magicka (which is close to a 5 piece bonus). So the value of Soulshine drops to 0 because you need to trade 2500 magicka to use it. Tons of sets are like this.

Tons more are just off. Julianos is 300 spell damage. This is a good baseline, since it's craftable, so probably should not be absolute BiS, but should be decent. Scathing and BSW are better, which is okay. So many other sets are noticeably worse for no reason. Destruction Master, for example. Equivalent spell damage of the 5 piece is only 250, plus you have to be using a staff (no dual wield). You can argue if Julianos should be better or worse as a principal, but why is Destruction Master 15% worse? Why not 5% worse? Or the same? Mother's Sorrow 5 piece bonus is worth half of Julianos, even with a crit damage focused build.

What's the result? Dozens of sets that on the surface seem viable, but the only real choices are BSW, Scathing, Julianos, Moondancer.

Summary Complaint
The stated goal from ZOS is to reduce the gap between very high end and the lower end of DPS.
The fact the in every aspect of the game, 90% of choices are bad, not by a little bit, but by a lot. The game itself doesn't make this clear at all with the "immersive" UI and character screens, meaning to even understand how bad the choices are you have to stalk various forums and spend hours / days really understanding how it comes together.

Rotation / Weaving is a whole separate battle, but the first step is either:
1) Make gear comparable. Most of the set bonuses are not complex, it's just simple math to understand what is better and by how much if you understand the mechanics. Make the difference between Scathing > Julianos > Other 5-7%, not 15-20%.
2) Make the difference in numbers super clear in game. Help people understand how much DPS they lose choosing healthy jewelry instead of Arcane.

Both would be ideal, but the easiest is #1, because again, you can fix 90% of sets with some simple number tweaks to bring them closer to the decent sets.

Even for experiences players, it would add a lot to the game for very low effort. It's very depressing that if you want to raid how limited you are in choices. I'm not in a super hardcore group, and would happily trade 2% DPS for some variety, but I cannot justify 15%.

STEVIL

Well several things i find jyst lacking in the analysis.

First - should add the limited closet or context. Should specify thatbout of the whole of edo play your analysis is basicalky limited to dps role in group/trial context. That is a shoebox in a closet of the whole of eso.

Second - because precise affects all crit chances, both damaging and healing, then it makes sense that the trait gives less help than the one which only affects damage and not healing (outside of few cases where healing is based off dsmage amount). This makes precise fairly comparable not for damage but for overall benefit for cases like solo play where self-heal crits matter. Also, of course, some builds that gain special brnefits from crits (NMG, SURGE, ETC) may see better overalk benefit from precise than from sharp.

Third - even from you chosen shoebox, shadow mundus can outperform thief in cases where your crit chance is about 60% or kore iirc.

I think the biggest takeaway from your analysis to me is that once you put on blinders and look only inside a shoebox, you can find you have created for yourself the illusion of the illusion of choice because you have chosen to only look at things bssed on how well thry fit in that shoebox.

SirDopey

amasuriel wrote: »

This is mostly a rant, after spending another afternoon theorycrafting to see if the new CP allocations open up any doors.

TL;DR I don't understand why the ZOS devs don't bother with basic math. It makes me sad how easy it would be to add some variety (and sad because it seems like it doesn't happen)

There are a huge number of choices on the surface. 9 Weapon traits. Dozens of sets. Mundus Stones. To a newer or less research oriented player, it seems like a tremendous number of choices.

Traits
Sharpened is still king. You need 50+ erosion to make it viable, even in a raid with Alkosh uptime. Since a gold precise staff is only 7% crit, which is only ~3.5% DPS. At current CP max it's much better to allocate more to other trees and have sharpened. Maybe When CP cap is 1k the math will change on that, but right now it's worse no matter what. Precise is the only trait even in the running, the others are hilariously bad.

Mundus
Thief equates to 7-8% DPS (16%+ crit chance) depending on your number of divines. This is literally double what you get out of Spell / Weapon damage or Stat

Sets
So many sets are sub par because of default choices. There are Templar build that would make use of Soulshine, but it only comes in heavy, and the jewelry only comes with health. The healthy jewelry may not sound like a big deal, but it's 2500 health (useless) vs Magicka (which is close to a 5 piece bonus). So the value of Soulshine drops to 0 because you need to trade 2500 magicka to use it. Tons of sets are like this.

Tons more are just off. Julianos is 300 spell damage. This is a good baseline, since it's craftable, so probably should not be absolute BiS, but should be decent. Scathing and BSW are better, which is okay. So many other sets are noticeably worse for no reason. Destruction Master, for example. Equivalent spell damage of the 5 piece is only 250, plus you have to be using a staff (no dual wield). You can argue if Julianos should be better or worse as a principal, but why is Destruction Master 15% worse? Why not 5% worse? Or the same? Mother's Sorrow 5 piece bonus is worth half of Julianos, even with a crit damage focused build.

What's the result? Dozens of sets that on the surface seem viable, but the only real choices are BSW, Scathing, Julianos, Moondancer.

Summary Complaint
The stated goal from ZOS is to reduce the gap between very high end and the lower end of DPS.
The fact the in every aspect of the game, 90% of choices are bad, not by a little bit, but by a lot. The game itself doesn't make this clear at all with the "immersive" UI and character screens, meaning to even understand how bad the choices are you have to stalk various forums and spend hours / days really understanding how it comes together.

Rotation / Weaving is a whole separate battle, but the first step is either:
1) Make gear comparable. Most of the set bonuses are not complex, it's just simple math to understand what is better and by how much if you understand the mechanics. Make the difference between Scathing > Julianos > Other 5-7%, not 15-20%.
2) Make the difference in numbers super clear in game. Help people understand how much DPS they lose choosing healthy jewelry instead of Arcane.

Both would be ideal, but the easiest is #1, because again, you can fix 90% of sets with some simple number tweaks to bring them closer to the decent sets.

Even for experiences players, it would add a lot to the game for very low effort. It's very depressing that if you want to raid how limited you are in choices. I'm not in a super hardcore group, and would happily trade 2% DPS for some variety, but I cannot justify 15%.

Actually, on my warden I'm running 5 spriggans with one infused mace (DW) with a poison enchant on it, finding it very effective and can still reach maximum penetration

Choices are out there, you just gotta look for them

amasuriel

SirDopey wrote: »

amasuriel wrote: »

This is mostly a rant, after spending another afternoon theorycrafting to see if the new CP allocations open up any doors.

TL;DR I don't understand why the ZOS devs don't bother with basic math. It makes me sad how easy it would be to add some variety (and sad because it seems like it doesn't happen)

There are a huge number of choices on the surface. 9 Weapon traits. Dozens of sets. Mundus Stones. To a newer or less research oriented player, it seems like a tremendous number of choices.

Traits
Sharpened is still king. You need 50+ erosion to make it viable, even in a raid with Alkosh uptime. Since a gold precise staff is only 7% crit, which is only ~3.5% DPS. At current CP max it's much better to allocate more to other trees and have sharpened. Maybe When CP cap is 1k the math will change on that, but right now it's worse no matter what. Precise is the only trait even in the running, the others are hilariously bad.

Mundus
Thief equates to 7-8% DPS (16%+ crit chance) depending on your number of divines. This is literally double what you get out of Spell / Weapon damage or Stat

Sets
So many sets are sub par because of default choices. There are Templar build that would make use of Soulshine, but it only comes in heavy, and the jewelry only comes with health. The healthy jewelry may not sound like a big deal, but it's 2500 health (useless) vs Magicka (which is close to a 5 piece bonus). So the value of Soulshine drops to 0 because you need to trade 2500 magicka to use it. Tons of sets are like this.

Tons more are just off. Julianos is 300 spell damage. This is a good baseline, since it's craftable, so probably should not be absolute BiS, but should be decent. Scathing and BSW are better, which is okay. So many other sets are noticeably worse for no reason. Destruction Master, for example. Equivalent spell damage of the 5 piece is only 250, plus you have to be using a staff (no dual wield). You can argue if Julianos should be better or worse as a principal, but why is Destruction Master 15% worse? Why not 5% worse? Or the same? Mother's Sorrow 5 piece bonus is worth half of Julianos, even with a crit damage focused build.

What's the result? Dozens of sets that on the surface seem viable, but the only real choices are BSW, Scathing, Julianos, Moondancer.

Summary Complaint
The stated goal from ZOS is to reduce the gap between very high end and the lower end of DPS.
The fact the in every aspect of the game, 90% of choices are bad, not by a little bit, but by a lot. The game itself doesn't make this clear at all with the "immersive" UI and character screens, meaning to even understand how bad the choices are you have to stalk various forums and spend hours / days really understanding how it comes together.

Rotation / Weaving is a whole separate battle, but the first step is either:
1) Make gear comparable. Most of the set bonuses are not complex, it's just simple math to understand what is better and by how much if you understand the mechanics. Make the difference between Scathing > Julianos > Other 5-7%, not 15-20%.
2) Make the difference in numbers super clear in game. Help people understand how much DPS they lose choosing healthy jewelry instead of Arcane.

Both would be ideal, but the easiest is #1, because again, you can fix 90% of sets with some simple number tweaks to bring them closer to the decent sets.

Even for experiences players, it would add a lot to the game for very low effort. It's very depressing that if you want to raid how limited you are in choices. I'm not in a super hardcore group, and would happily trade 2% DPS for some variety, but I cannot justify 15%.

Actually, on my warden I'm running 5 spriggans with one infused mace (DW) with a poison enchant on it, finding it very effective and can still reach maximum penetration

Choices are out there, you just gotta look for them

You give up a 5 piece bonus to run spriggans, which one average are worth something like 7-8% DPS. I'm not saying you cannot max penetrate without sharpened, I'm saying your DPS will be lower than if you went sharpened.

SirDopey

amasuriel wrote: »

SirDopey wrote: »

amasuriel wrote: »

This is mostly a rant, after spending another afternoon theorycrafting to see if the new CP allocations open up any doors.

TL;DR I don't understand why the ZOS devs don't bother with basic math. It makes me sad how easy it would be to add some variety (and sad because it seems like it doesn't happen)

There are a huge number of choices on the surface. 9 Weapon traits. Dozens of sets. Mundus Stones. To a newer or less research oriented player, it seems like a tremendous number of choices.

Traits
Sharpened is still king. You need 50+ erosion to make it viable, even in a raid with Alkosh uptime. Since a gold precise staff is only 7% crit, which is only ~3.5% DPS. At current CP max it's much better to allocate more to other trees and have sharpened. Maybe When CP cap is 1k the math will change on that, but right now it's worse no matter what. Precise is the only trait even in the running, the others are hilariously bad.

Mundus
Thief equates to 7-8% DPS (16%+ crit chance) depending on your number of divines. This is literally double what you get out of Spell / Weapon damage or Stat

Sets
So many sets are sub par because of default choices. There are Templar build that would make use of Soulshine, but it only comes in heavy, and the jewelry only comes with health. The healthy jewelry may not sound like a big deal, but it's 2500 health (useless) vs Magicka (which is close to a 5 piece bonus). So the value of Soulshine drops to 0 because you need to trade 2500 magicka to use it. Tons of sets are like this.

Tons more are just off. Julianos is 300 spell damage. This is a good baseline, since it's craftable, so probably should not be absolute BiS, but should be decent. Scathing and BSW are better, which is okay. So many other sets are noticeably worse for no reason. Destruction Master, for example. Equivalent spell damage of the 5 piece is only 250, plus you have to be using a staff (no dual wield). You can argue if Julianos should be better or worse as a principal, but why is Destruction Master 15% worse? Why not 5% worse? Or the same? Mother's Sorrow 5 piece bonus is worth half of Julianos, even with a crit damage focused build.

What's the result? Dozens of sets that on the surface seem viable, but the only real choices are BSW, Scathing, Julianos, Moondancer.

Summary Complaint
The stated goal from ZOS is to reduce the gap between very high end and the lower end of DPS.
The fact the in every aspect of the game, 90% of choices are bad, not by a little bit, but by a lot. The game itself doesn't make this clear at all with the "immersive" UI and character screens, meaning to even understand how bad the choices are you have to stalk various forums and spend hours / days really understanding how it comes together.

Rotation / Weaving is a whole separate battle, but the first step is either:
1) Make gear comparable. Most of the set bonuses are not complex, it's just simple math to understand what is better and by how much if you understand the mechanics. Make the difference between Scathing > Julianos > Other 5-7%, not 15-20%.
2) Make the difference in numbers super clear in game. Help people understand how much DPS they lose choosing healthy jewelry instead of Arcane.

Both would be ideal, but the easiest is #1, because again, you can fix 90% of sets with some simple number tweaks to bring them closer to the decent sets.

Even for experiences players, it would add a lot to the game for very low effort. It's very depressing that if you want to raid how limited you are in choices. I'm not in a super hardcore group, and would happily trade 2% DPS for some variety, but I cannot justify 15%.

Actually, on my warden I'm running 5 spriggans with one infused mace (DW) with a poison enchant on it, finding it very effective and can still reach maximum penetration

Choices are out there, you just gotta look for them

You give up a 5 piece bonus to run spriggans, which one average are worth something like 7-8% DPS. I'm not saying you cannot max penetrate without sharpened, I'm saying your DPS will be lower than if you went sharpened.

Only in a raid setting with multiple other stamina users (in which case I equip sheer venom). Without the extra sources of penetration / armor debuffs I lose too much DPS running a pure dps set like automotation/hundings/NMG. Spriggans also lets me run veli instead of Krag's which does a bunch more damage

Pretty sure the BiS for stamina at the moment is VO + Two Fanged Serpent (a penetration set)

amasuriel

STEVIL wrote: »

Well several things i find jyst lacking in the analysis.

First - should add the limited closet or context. Should specify thatbout of the whole of edo play your analysis is basicalky limited to dps role in group/trial context. That is a shoebox in a closet of the whole of eso.

Second - because precise affects all crit chances, both damaging and healing, then it makes sense that the trait gives less help than the one which only affects damage and not healing (outside of few cases where healing is based off dsmage amount). This makes precise fairly comparable not for damage but for overall benefit for cases like solo play where self-heal crits matter. Also, of course, some builds that gain special brnefits from crits (NMG, SURGE, ETC) may see better overalk benefit from precise than from sharp.

Third - even from you chosen shoebox, shadow mundus can outperform thief in cases where your crit chance is about 60% or kore iirc.

I think the biggest takeaway from your analysis to me is that once you put on blinders and look only inside a shoebox, you can find you have created for yourself the illusion of the illusion of choice because you have chosen to only look at things bssed on how well thry fit in that shoebox.

Yes, I could have specified DPS, though the situation isn't much different for healing or tanking where the BiS is a runaway choice. It's also PvE obviously, not PvP.

I started to reply point by point, but instead let me ask you this.

What would the disadvantage be of someone spending literally a day tweaking the numbers on sets, mundus and the easier to balance traits so that the options (which are already in game) are closer in strength? Is there some benefit to a 5 piece DPS set like Mother Sorrow or Destruction Mastery being simply worse by a wide margin than other, similar choices?

Regardless of how big a slice of gameplay veteran group content is / should be in ESO, why do you object to the options they create being reasonably balanced where possible? There will always be something slightly better, but if the operative word was slightly we wouldn't be having this conversation.

amasuriel

SirDopey wrote: »

amasuriel wrote: »

SirDopey wrote: »

amasuriel wrote: »

This is mostly a rant, after spending another afternoon theorycrafting to see if the new CP allocations open up any doors.

TL;DR I don't understand why the ZOS devs don't bother with basic math. It makes me sad how easy it would be to add some variety (and sad because it seems like it doesn't happen)

There are a huge number of choices on the surface. 9 Weapon traits. Dozens of sets. Mundus Stones. To a newer or less research oriented player, it seems like a tremendous number of choices.

Traits
Sharpened is still king. You need 50+ erosion to make it viable, even in a raid with Alkosh uptime. Since a gold precise staff is only 7% crit, which is only ~3.5% DPS. At current CP max it's much better to allocate more to other trees and have sharpened. Maybe When CP cap is 1k the math will change on that, but right now it's worse no matter what. Precise is the only trait even in the running, the others are hilariously bad.

Mundus
Thief equates to 7-8% DPS (16%+ crit chance) depending on your number of divines. This is literally double what you get out of Spell / Weapon damage or Stat

Sets
So many sets are sub par because of default choices. There are Templar build that would make use of Soulshine, but it only comes in heavy, and the jewelry only comes with health. The healthy jewelry may not sound like a big deal, but it's 2500 health (useless) vs Magicka (which is close to a 5 piece bonus). So the value of Soulshine drops to 0 because you need to trade 2500 magicka to use it. Tons of sets are like this.

Tons more are just off. Julianos is 300 spell damage. This is a good baseline, since it's craftable, so probably should not be absolute BiS, but should be decent. Scathing and BSW are better, which is okay. So many other sets are noticeably worse for no reason. Destruction Master, for example. Equivalent spell damage of the 5 piece is only 250, plus you have to be using a staff (no dual wield). You can argue if Julianos should be better or worse as a principal, but why is Destruction Master 15% worse? Why not 5% worse? Or the same? Mother's Sorrow 5 piece bonus is worth half of Julianos, even with a crit damage focused build.

What's the result? Dozens of sets that on the surface seem viable, but the only real choices are BSW, Scathing, Julianos, Moondancer.

Summary Complaint
The stated goal from ZOS is to reduce the gap between very high end and the lower end of DPS.
The fact the in every aspect of the game, 90% of choices are bad, not by a little bit, but by a lot. The game itself doesn't make this clear at all with the "immersive" UI and character screens, meaning to even understand how bad the choices are you have to stalk various forums and spend hours / days really understanding how it comes together.

Rotation / Weaving is a whole separate battle, but the first step is either:
1) Make gear comparable. Most of the set bonuses are not complex, it's just simple math to understand what is better and by how much if you understand the mechanics. Make the difference between Scathing > Julianos > Other 5-7%, not 15-20%.
2) Make the difference in numbers super clear in game. Help people understand how much DPS they lose choosing healthy jewelry instead of Arcane.

Both would be ideal, but the easiest is #1, because again, you can fix 90% of sets with some simple number tweaks to bring them closer to the decent sets.

Even for experiences players, it would add a lot to the game for very low effort. It's very depressing that if you want to raid how limited you are in choices. I'm not in a super hardcore group, and would happily trade 2% DPS for some variety, but I cannot justify 15%.

Actually, on my warden I'm running 5 spriggans with one infused mace (DW) with a poison enchant on it, finding it very effective and can still reach maximum penetration

Choices are out there, you just gotta look for them

You give up a 5 piece bonus to run spriggans, which one average are worth something like 7-8% DPS. I'm not saying you cannot max penetrate without sharpened, I'm saying your DPS will be lower than if you went sharpened.

Only in a raid setting with multiple other stamina users (in which case I equip sheer venom). Without the extra sources of penetration / armor debuffs I lose too much DPS running a pure dps set like automotation/hundings/NMG. Spriggans also lets me run veli instead of Krag's which does a bunch more damage

Pretty sure the BiS for stamina at the moment is VO + Two Fanged Serpent (a penetration set)

Stam penetration with twice fanged is
100 base
5000 Twice Fanged
5280 Major Breach

Which means unless you have other stam users applying NMG or Sunderflame you will still be better off with at least 1 sharpened weapon (~2500) plus some points in penetration CP. If you have NMG / Sunderflame on other people it can be viable to skip sharpened entirely, but it's rare to have 3+ stam DPS in a trial group these days.

Remember that every ~500 mitigation is 1% DPS roughly in PvE, so the boss only needs ~1750 mitigation left to cancel out the precise trait on 2 gold 1 handed weapons. Depending on the group composition and CP it's not impossible.

Of course, don't forget that this is only even remotely viable for precise, and only if you give up a 5 piece for penetration. If you do

100 base
5000 dual sharpened
5280 Major Breach

You can make whatever combo of support sets and CP to make up the difference just like you would to cover for sharpened, and I'm pretty sure the the 5 piece bonus you pick up instead will be worth more than the extra 3.5% DPS you get from precise. Twice fanged BiS setup you still want 1 sharpened weapon.

More to the point though, Nirnhoned, the distant 3rd place contestant, is even father away from viable, again for no reason other than nobody willing to spend a day running the numbers and adjusting them slightly.

Tasear

The illusion is you think there aren't choices. This game has way more freedom then any other.

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/dark-priestess-pug-proof/

One example

What is limiting you is your perception.

STEVIL

amasuriel wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Well several things i find jyst lacking in the analysis.

First - should add the limited closet or context. Should specify thatbout of the whole of edo play your analysis is basicalky limited to dps role in group/trial context. That is a shoebox in a closet of the whole of eso.

Second - because precise affects all crit chances, both damaging and healing, then it makes sense that the trait gives less help than the one which only affects damage and not healing (outside of few cases where healing is based off dsmage amount). This makes precise fairly comparable not for damage but for overall benefit for cases like solo play where self-heal crits matter. Also, of course, some builds that gain special brnefits from crits (NMG, SURGE, ETC) may see better overalk benefit from precise than from sharp.

Third - even from you chosen shoebox, shadow mundus can outperform thief in cases where your crit chance is about 60% or kore iirc.

I think the biggest takeaway from your analysis to me is that once you put on blinders and look only inside a shoebox, you can find you have created for yourself the illusion of the illusion of choice because you have chosen to only look at things bssed on how well thry fit in that shoebox.

Yes, I could have specified DPS, though the situation isn't much different for healing or tanking where the BiS is a runaway choice. It's also PvE obviously, not PvP.

I started to reply point by point, but instead let me ask you this.

What would the disadvantage be of someone spending literally a day tweaking the numbers on sets, mundus and the easier to balance traits so that the options (which are already in game) are closer in strength? Is there some benefit to a 5 piece DPS set like Mother Sorrow or Destruction Mastery being simply worse by a wide margin than other, similar choices?

Regardless of how big a slice of gameplay veteran group content is / should be in ESO, why do you object to the options they create being reasonably balanced where possible? There will always be something slightly better, but if the operative word was slightly we wouldn't be having this conversation.

wrong.

In the shoeboxes you are looking at a percentage or two is enough to be decisive as to which is used. Your exaggerated best examples for your case work out to like 3-4%. That difference is easily going to be overshadowed by play. Anything under perfect rotations will vary by more.

And again you tend to kerp focusing on one role goals, different shoebox, same closet.

You ask whatbis the problem with closer? Answer is everything outside thecshoebox.

If precise got "close enough" for the shoebox dps that it did not warrant discusdion as to the difference but kept its healing boost in all tge other pve content, solo particularly, then sharpened becomes the niche only trait whike precise becomes a workhorse.

Then we get the threads asking for sharpen to be helped.

The illusion is that there is a sweet spot where its all good.

The illusion is that this "inward" looking design can ever help but to create bests and wanbabes.

The illusion is that the trait values are the problem.

The truth is the problem is in the content combined with the inward looking traits.

Instead of having precise, nirn and sharp weapons do the same thing (raise output) agsinst everything by changing different variables in the equation have them do the same thing but in different situations. One type could be have nirn raise damage by X% and have precise and sharp raise dmg by 2X% but only for AOE for sharp and single target for precise. Or have precise be better with direct dmg and sharp with dot. Or precise vs undead/daedra and sharp vs beasts.

Same thing for armor traits. Nirn goid vs all but other traits better vs types of damage.

This way there is no one solution but lots of solutions that vary a lot by content and challenge.

Lexifer452

@Taesar

Is there anywhere you won't plug your healer build?

At this point I won't be checking it out simply because I see it linked so often in so many threads.

Not starting a fight, just saying.

Yes there are choices in eso but not nearly enough. And way less when it comes to having an optimized build. I kind of feel like the people arguing with op are only arguing to argue. There are a veritable *** ton of item sets in this game and the vast, vast majority (80-90%) of them are utterly useless to any serious player's character.

Item sets aside though, out of all the mundus stones and all the traits, how many have you personally ever used? 3, 4 of each maybe? How can you argue that it wouldn't be nice to have the best in slot gear setup options not be so small in number. Sure there will always be a best in slot set for whatever class/role but the op's point is, I think, would it hurt anything to have ten, or twenty, or hell, even just 4 or 5 best in slot competitor sets? Why do you feel greater viable variety is bad?

And most of all why do you defend the developers actions on this front innately?

SirDopey

amasuriel wrote: »

SirDopey wrote: »

amasuriel wrote: »

SirDopey wrote: »

amasuriel wrote: »

This is mostly a rant, after spending another afternoon theorycrafting to see if the new CP allocations open up any doors.

TL;DR I don't understand why the ZOS devs don't bother with basic math. It makes me sad how easy it would be to add some variety (and sad because it seems like it doesn't happen)

There are a huge number of choices on the surface. 9 Weapon traits. Dozens of sets. Mundus Stones. To a newer or less research oriented player, it seems like a tremendous number of choices.

Traits
Sharpened is still king. You need 50+ erosion to make it viable, even in a raid with Alkosh uptime. Since a gold precise staff is only 7% crit, which is only ~3.5% DPS. At current CP max it's much better to allocate more to other trees and have sharpened. Maybe When CP cap is 1k the math will change on that, but right now it's worse no matter what. Precise is the only trait even in the running, the others are hilariously bad.

Mundus
Thief equates to 7-8% DPS (16%+ crit chance) depending on your number of divines. This is literally double what you get out of Spell / Weapon damage or Stat

Sets
So many sets are sub par because of default choices. There are Templar build that would make use of Soulshine, but it only comes in heavy, and the jewelry only comes with health. The healthy jewelry may not sound like a big deal, but it's 2500 health (useless) vs Magicka (which is close to a 5 piece bonus). So the value of Soulshine drops to 0 because you need to trade 2500 magicka to use it. Tons of sets are like this.

Tons more are just off. Julianos is 300 spell damage. This is a good baseline, since it's craftable, so probably should not be absolute BiS, but should be decent. Scathing and BSW are better, which is okay. So many other sets are noticeably worse for no reason. Destruction Master, for example. Equivalent spell damage of the 5 piece is only 250, plus you have to be using a staff (no dual wield). You can argue if Julianos should be better or worse as a principal, but why is Destruction Master 15% worse? Why not 5% worse? Or the same? Mother's Sorrow 5 piece bonus is worth half of Julianos, even with a crit damage focused build.

What's the result? Dozens of sets that on the surface seem viable, but the only real choices are BSW, Scathing, Julianos, Moondancer.

Summary Complaint
The stated goal from ZOS is to reduce the gap between very high end and the lower end of DPS.
The fact the in every aspect of the game, 90% of choices are bad, not by a little bit, but by a lot. The game itself doesn't make this clear at all with the "immersive" UI and character screens, meaning to even understand how bad the choices are you have to stalk various forums and spend hours / days really understanding how it comes together.

Rotation / Weaving is a whole separate battle, but the first step is either:
1) Make gear comparable. Most of the set bonuses are not complex, it's just simple math to understand what is better and by how much if you understand the mechanics. Make the difference between Scathing > Julianos > Other 5-7%, not 15-20%.
2) Make the difference in numbers super clear in game. Help people understand how much DPS they lose choosing healthy jewelry instead of Arcane.

Both would be ideal, but the easiest is #1, because again, you can fix 90% of sets with some simple number tweaks to bring them closer to the decent sets.

Even for experiences players, it would add a lot to the game for very low effort. It's very depressing that if you want to raid how limited you are in choices. I'm not in a super hardcore group, and would happily trade 2% DPS for some variety, but I cannot justify 15%.

Actually, on my warden I'm running 5 spriggans with one infused mace (DW) with a poison enchant on it, finding it very effective and can still reach maximum penetration

Choices are out there, you just gotta look for them

You give up a 5 piece bonus to run spriggans, which one average are worth something like 7-8% DPS. I'm not saying you cannot max penetrate without sharpened, I'm saying your DPS will be lower than if you went sharpened.

Only in a raid setting with multiple other stamina users (in which case I equip sheer venom). Without the extra sources of penetration / armor debuffs I lose too much DPS running a pure dps set like automotation/hundings/NMG. Spriggans also lets me run veli instead of Krag's which does a bunch more damage

Pretty sure the BiS for stamina at the moment is VO + Two Fanged Serpent (a penetration set)

Stam penetration with twice fanged is
100 base
5000 Twice Fanged
5280 Major Breach

Which means unless you have other stam users applying NMG or Sunderflame you will still be better off with at least 1 sharpened weapon (~2500) plus some points in penetration CP. If you have NMG / Sunderflame on other people it can be viable to skip sharpened entirely, but it's rare to have 3+ stam DPS in a trial group these days.

Remember that every ~500 mitigation is 1% DPS roughly in PvE, so the boss only needs ~1750 mitigation left to cancel out the precise trait on 2 gold 1 handed weapons. Depending on the group composition and CP it's not impossible.

Of course, don't forget that this is only even remotely viable for precise, and only if you give up a 5 piece for penetration. If you do

100 base
5000 dual sharpened
5280 Major Breach

You can make whatever combo of support sets and CP to make up the difference just like you would to cover for sharpened, and I'm pretty sure the the 5 piece bonus you pick up instead will be worth more than the extra 3.5% DPS you get from precise. Twice fanged BiS setup you still want 1 sharpened weapon.

More to the point though, Nirnhoned, the distant 3rd place contestant, is even father away from viable, again for no reason other than nobody willing to spend a day running the numbers and adjusting them slightly.

Still running one sharpened. I've only ever mentioned the option of swapping out one weapon not both. Infused poison enchant for me is criting for over 8k roughly every 2nd light attack, do the math.

Like some of the others have suggested, I think you've worked yourself into a box and put on your blinkers. You're clearly refusing to accept there are alternative choices available. If you don't want to listen, I wont talk.

amasuriel

Lexifer452 wrote: »

@Taesar

Is there anywhere you won't plug your healer build?

At this point I won't be checking it out simply because I see it linked so often in so many threads.

Not starting a fight, just saying.

Yes there are choices in eso but not nearly enough. And way less when it comes to having an optimized build. I kind of feel like the people arguing with op are only arguing to argue. There are a veritable *** ton of item sets in this game and the vast, vast majority (80-90%) of them are utterly useless to any serious player's character.

Item sets aside though, out of all the mundus stones and all the traits, how many have you personally ever used? 3, 4 of each maybe? How can you argue that it wouldn't be nice to have the best in slot gear setup options not be so small in number. Sure there will always be a best in slot set for whatever class/role but the op's point is, I think, would it hurt anything to have ten, or twenty, or hell, even just 4 or 5 best in slot competitor sets? Why do you feel greater viable variety is bad?

And most of all why do you defend the developers actions on this front innately?

Thanks Lexifer, at least one person got my point.

theamazingx

You might want to doublecheck magplar BiS before using it as an example. BSW no longer is, Scathing hasn't been, and in fact, the current variety of julianos vs war maiden and moondancer vs master architect, and even dw vs destro seems to be exactly what you're asking for.

Xvorg

Soulshine + war maiden is a good pairing for any magplar when built towards channels. Even (and especially) with MS resto staff.

Lavennin

I agree the choices aren't enough. I may be biased, as I just came from Path of Exile. But that's the kind of diversity that's really diversity in my opinion.

I tried to theorycraft a few times. Every time I got a new overland set piece I tried to think of a way to better use it, but the numbers just seemed bad. For example I considered exoskeleton for my NB healer, as it seemed like an interesting way to make up the lack of burst via constant ult usage, and...I don't even need to explain. If it were POE, more likely than not I could make a decent character based on this mechanic alone.

So the potential is there, but the numbers are lacking.

As for the illusion of choice, ESO doesn't do a good job either. I mean, I can't even be a somewhat competent arcane archer...so no illusion for me.

Musclemagic

STEVIL wrote: »

Well several things i find jyst lacking in the analysis.
In the shoeboxes you are looking at a percentage or two is enough to be decisive as to which is used. Your exaggerated best examples for your case work out to like 3-4%. That difference is easily going to be overshadowed by play. Anything under perfect rotations will vary by more.

I agree with what you about the shoebox viewpoint, a lot of the other options are viable for different setups. However, if you're using 3 different sets, and not using the right enchants/traits, that "3-4%" per screw up can become a 30-40% difference. There's no way to make that up. Even 10% stat difference or regen differences from racials makes a big impact on performance. Someone choosing a different set that "sounds just as good" if they don't know the math, while everything else is the same, and being 1/10th worse than the other person is a HUGE deal.

Xvorg

Lavennin wrote: »

I agree the choices aren't enough. I may be biased, as I just came from Path of Exile. But that's the kind of diversity that's really diversity in my opinion.

I tried to theorycraft a few times. Every time I got a new overland set piece I tried to think of a way to better use it, but the numbers just seemed bad. For example I considered exoskeleton for my NB healer, as it seemed like an interesting way to make up the lack of burst via constant ult usage, and...I don't even need to explain. If it were POE, more likely than not I could make a decent character based on this mechanic alone.

So the potential is there, but the numbers are lacking.

As for the illusion of choice, ESO doesn't do a good job either. I mean, I can't even be a somewhat competent arcane archer...so no illusion for me.

You can't compare POE to ESO. POE was done based on diversity. ESO needed to narow diversity to be viable at the point it dismissed spellcrafting.

Sikthlight08xz

Lexifer452 wrote: »

I kind of feel like the people arguing with op are only arguing to argue.

So much this.. The majority, every single time any where~
_

There never will be true build diversity so long as ZOS caters to the holy trinity of Tank/Dps/Healer.
If there is a 4th role in there its the 'Support' But lets be honest, its always a sub-par hybrid of all or two.

Personally i've given up on staying competitive and just went for a gimpy nb build that just focuses on stealth kills. Find it the only way to enjoy this game.

Gargath

amasuriel wrote: »

So many other sets are noticeably worse for no reason.

They are noticeably worse just for some others to be really good, but each set has a purpose and can be used for a different build. For example I use 2 sets for stealing and assassintion, that are not dealing damage, but decreasing range of detection and letting me to run in stealth at no stamina cost. Are they worse? Definitely not, they just serve another purpose.

STEVIL

Gargath wrote: »

amasuriel wrote: »

So many other sets are noticeably worse for no reason.

They are noticeably worse just for some others to be really good, but each set has a purpose and can be used for a different build. For example I use 2 sets for stealing and assassintion, that are not dealing damage, but decreasing range of detection and letting me to run in stealth at no stamina cost. Are they worse? Definitely not, they just serve another purpose.

Absolutely - vamp nb with the right sets... just sneak at will.

i have stated elsewhere, and here in part, that most of ther perception of lack of diversity comes from focusing on the shoebox of leaderboard competitive DPS only in the closet of fully supported end game g/t with an occasional nod to pvp.

look at other challenges and see other options.

But for this shoebox in a closet in a mansion myopic viewpoint to change IMO two very fundamental changes need to occur and they have almost nothing to do with sets or item counts.

1 - Content - challenges have to be added that dont make DPS the predominant puzzle solver. more challenge in g/t content that force heal-thru and sneak-to-ease and tank-to-ease solutions would go a long way to diversifying the "needs."

2 - Traits - the inward focus of traits on "my stats" has to be replaced with outward facing "what am i fighting" trait system so that no trait is better everywhere and every trait is better somewhere.

once building a single "meta-set" doesnt get you thru your role in every challenge then more diverse builds, even maybe several for each dungeon will become "visible."

AverageJo3Gam3r

OP, the issue with your suggestions is they still lead to lack of choice. If you bring a set to be within 5% of the meta set, instead of 15% worse than the meta set that it is now...you still have no choice. There's clearly a set that will give you the highest dps numbers.

To create real build diversity, what you should really be asking for is meaningful tradeoffs. Look at MDKs in pvp as an example. You can have sustain, damage, or survivability. Pick two. This has led to a wide variety of mdk builds, all viable in their own way.

ezeepeezee

AverageJo3Gam3r wrote: »

OP, the issue with your suggestions is they still lead to lack of choice. If you bring a set to be within 5% of the meta set, instead of 15% worse than the meta set that it is now...you still have no choice. There's clearly a set that will give you the highest dps numbers.

To create real build diversity, what you should really be asking for is meaningful tradeoffs. Look at MDKs in pvp as an example. You can have sustain, damage, or survivability. Pick two. This has led to a wide variety of mdk builds, all viable in their own way.

This is exactly how I see it. I personally think that sets should provide mechanical advantages (a la Fjord's), or bonuses that must be exploited to be used while proc'd (a la Kena). In this way you can build a truly unique character that has to actually /be played/ a certain way, thus increasing the range of interesting choices. This free damage, free stat stuff is harmful to the game.

Autolycus

The first step to determining viability is stop pretending that BiS and min/max are synonymous to viable. They're not the same thing. Nearly all semi-logical combinations are viable for everything in this game outside of veteran trials, which is a specific form of content that is and never has been intended for the majority. The constant presence of meta theorycrafters and mathematicians creates the illusion that there is no choice, in and of itself. There is a choice, there always has been, and choice is a primary reason many play this game. Likewise, there is and always will be a "best" option. Distinguishing between the two, rather than constantly trying to mold them together as one, is an important distinction and a rather pointless effort. That being said, we (the community on the whole) incorrectly presumed that "raising the floor" meant making it easier for new/returning/casual players to achieve higher metrics, when ZOS actually made it more difficult. However, despite a new learning curve due to sustain changes, many of the changes made in Morrowind have opened up many options in endgame content that have always been deemed sub-par by a mile, such as the use of an infused + sharpened weapon setup vs. the hands-down always-dual-sharpened scenario we've seen for the last two years.

Second, the math does actually support these arguments pretty well. I've not seen anything inaccurate in the OP, assuming the majority of players even care about using BiS gear and weapons, and optimizing their stats (including CP). BiS trials setups are definitively better for overland and solo content as well in a wide range of cases. Before anyone get salty, understand I mean most of them are, not all, and a very large factor in this conclusion is the concept of proficiency. If one intends to call these BiS for overland and solo content, one must also admit a certain proficiency and a large time investment in that particular setup and playstyle too. The reason is because in an overwhelming number of cases new/returning/casual players who wish to make improvements, who turn to force-fed best builds, find themselves lacking the time investment and the knowledge of the build itself that justifies it as being the best. They, in turn, run these setups and find their results are mediocre at best, and certainly nowhere near the results that are posted by those who are actually very proficient and knowledgeable in their respective selections because they have invested the time and effort into understanding it. At the end of the day, you see these less-practiced and less-knowledgeable players, who really are just trying to do research and make improvements, invest a substantial amount of their limited time and gold on acclaimed BiS setups, only to realize they aren't on-par with the standards to make it truly best (i.e. practicing a rotation for a collective dozens of hours just to hit decent parses, and still be far from what's advertised).

Going back to my point about viability and how it's not synonymous to BiS - the community on the whole should either recognize this and stop advertising things in a manner that depicts them as the only true option, or the majority of the community looking for information to help them improve needs to come to understand that there are a lot of options that are truly viable in between their current setup and the meta. I have personally set out on non-competitive trials and dungeons with hundreds of people, maybe even thousands by now, who are not running BiS setups and aren't anywhere near perfect in their rotation, and they are totally capable of enjoying the vast majority of content in this game. Sometimes it takes longer, sometimes it's a little rough, but they generally get through it still, and have fun doing so. I've also spent hundreds of hours running with people who can post these kinds of meta results, but the underlying point is that the two are completely separate concepts, and trying to mold them together as a single entity is like trying to mix oil and water. Can I put together some thematic build that is purely for the enjoyment, obviously falls way behind the concept of "best," and still enjoy and complete most content in this game? Absolutely. That's what viable means, and there are dozens of sets that fall into this category. They are from best, but best does not equal viable.

Torbschka

The illlusion of time was such a great game

Tasear

Autolycus wrote: »

The first step to determining viability is stop pretending that BiS and min/max are synonymous to viable. They're not the same thing. Nearly all semi-logical combinations are viable for everything in this game outside of veteran trials, which is a specific form of content that is and never has been intended for the majority. The constant presence of meta theorycrafters and mathematicians creates the illusion that there is no choice, in and of itself. There is a choice, there always has been, and choice is a primary reason many play this game. Likewise, there is and always will be a "best" option. Distinguishing between the two, rather than constantly trying to mold them together as one, is an important distinction and a rather pointless effort. That being said, we (the community on the whole) incorrectly presumed that "raising the floor" meant making it easier for new/returning/casual players to achieve higher metrics, when ZOS actually made it more difficult. However, despite a new learning curve due to sustain changes, many of the changes made in Morrowind have opened up many options in endgame content that have always been deemed sub-par by a mile, such as the use of an infused + sharpened weapon setup vs. the hands-down always-dual-sharpened scenario we've seen for the last two years.

Second, the math does actually support these arguments pretty well. I've not seen anything inaccurate in the OP, assuming the majority of players even care about using BiS gear and weapons, and optimizing their stats (including CP). BiS trials setups are definitively better for overland and solo content as well in a wide range of cases. Before anyone get salty, understand I mean most of them are, not all, and a very large factor in this conclusion is the concept of proficiency. If one intends to call these BiS for overland and solo content, one must also admit a certain proficiency and a large time investment in that particular setup and playstyle too. The reason is because in an overwhelming number of cases new/returning/casual players who wish to make improvements, who turn to force-fed best builds, find themselves lacking the time investment and the knowledge of the build itself that justifies it as being the best. They, in turn, run these setups and find their results are mediocre at best, and certainly nowhere near the results that are posted by those who are actually very proficient and knowledgeable in their respective selections because they have invested the time and effort into understanding it. At the end of the day, you see these less-practiced and less-knowledgeable players, who really are just trying to do research and make improvements, invest a substantial amount of their limited time and gold on acclaimed BiS setups, only to realize they aren't on-par with the standards to make it truly best (i.e. practicing a rotation for a collective dozens of hours just to hit decent parses, and still be far from what's advertised).

Going back to my point about viability and how it's not synonymous to BiS - the community on the whole should either recognize this and stop advertising things in a manner that depicts them as the only true option, or the majority of the community looking for information to help them improve needs to come to understand that there are a lot of options that are truly viable in between their current setup and the meta. I have personally set out on non-competitive trials and dungeons with hundreds of people, maybe even thousands by now, who are not running BiS setups and aren't anywhere near perfect in their rotation, and they are totally capable of enjoying the vast majority of content in this game. Sometimes it takes longer, sometimes it's a little rough, but they generally get through it still, and have fun doing so. I've also spent hundreds of hours running with people who can post these kinds of meta results, but the underlying point is that the two are completely separate concepts, and trying to mold them together as a single entity is like trying to mix oil and water. Can I put together some thematic build that is purely for the enjoyment, obviously falls way behind the concept of "best," and still enjoy and complete most content in this game? Absolutely. That's what viable means, and there are dozens of sets that fall into this category. They are from best, but best does not equal viable.

This person makes sense. It s just Op perspective is skewed. There was a time when netch and twin fang were trash sets. Then someone proofed they were not. In regards to sharpened yes that sucks for DPS only. Then again didn't they raise spell erision and such? Don't you have champion points​ OP. Back on weapon traits maybe we just haven't explored enough..last year charged was a joke.. now it's love of healers.