Maintenance for the week of January 5:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – January 7, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – January 7, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – January 7, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – January 7, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
ZOS, Something Doesn't Add Up (Morrowind Sustain Changes)
GrumpyDuckling
✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
Back in September 2016, ZOS, you told us that you use hard data when balancing.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/291607/zos-claims-to-use-hard-data-for-balancing/p1
The creative director even jumped into the thread to post evidence of "hard data." But after the drastic sustain changes in the Morrowind patch, something doesn't add up and I have to ask this question:
Did you use "hard data" when originally constructing the sustain nodes in CP trees, armor sustain passives, and class sustain passives?
I ask because it is hard to believe that you would make sweeping and substantial changes to sustain if you were originally using hard data to construct sustain nodes in CP trees, armor sustain passives, and class sustain passives.
You had data for how the game played without CP, but then still decided to go ahead and release CP nodes with cost reduction up to 16% - only to then later completely wipe those nodes out. Toss in some of the armor passive changes and we're talking a 23% cost reduction for some builds that just went poof - and that's before even considering regen reductions to CP and armor.
Some Key Morrowind Sustain Changes from Morrowing Patch Notes:
How could such drastic changes be made if "hard data" was being used all along?
@ZOS_GinaBruno
@ZOS_RichLambert
Edit: Updated on 3/28/18 to again question the decision making that led to the Morrowind sustain changes. Players have since adapted, including myself, but I still think that game play was more fun before the sustain changes.
Edit: Updated on 5/8/18 to tag @ZOS_Holden , who has been great in responding to feedback and interacting with the community.
Edit: Updated on 5/23/18. It's been almost a year since the drastic Morrowind sustain changes, and this question still hasn't been answered.
Edited by GrumpyDuckling on May 24, 2018 12:59AM https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/291607/zos-claims-to-use-hard-data-for-balancing/p1
The creative director even jumped into the thread to post evidence of "hard data." But after the drastic sustain changes in the Morrowind patch, something doesn't add up and I have to ask this question:
Did you use "hard data" when originally constructing the sustain nodes in CP trees, armor sustain passives, and class sustain passives?
I ask because it is hard to believe that you would make sweeping and substantial changes to sustain if you were originally using hard data to construct sustain nodes in CP trees, armor sustain passives, and class sustain passives.
You had data for how the game played without CP, but then still decided to go ahead and release CP nodes with cost reduction up to 16% - only to then later completely wipe those nodes out. Toss in some of the armor passive changes and we're talking a 23% cost reduction for some builds that just went poof - and that's before even considering regen reductions to CP and armor.
Some Key Morrowind Sustain Changes from Morrowing Patch Notes:
Light Armor
Swapped the Evocation and Recovery passives in the Skill Line window.
Evocation: This is now a 2-point passive, originally 3-points. It now reduces the cost of your Magicka abilities by 1/2% per piece of Light Armor, down from 1/2/3%.
Recovery: This is now a 3-point passive, originally 2-points. It now increases your Magicka Recovery by 2/3/4% per piece of Light Armor, instead of 2/4%.
Medium Armor
Wind Walker: This passive ability now reduces the cost of your Stamina abilities by 1/2% per piece of Medium Armor, down from 2/3%.
Heavy Armor
Constitution: Reduced the Magicka and Stamina restored by this passive ability by approximately 42%.
The Champion System has received three major rebalancing efforts this update:
Categorized and standardized the 100-point values
Made the passive values more frontloaded
Adjusted and redesigned several passives so there is now a counter to each major category of Champion passive
First, to improve diversity in points spent, many Champion ability 100-point values have been adjusted. Stronger, more globally-useful passives such as Mighty, Quick Recovery, and Mooncalf have had their end-point values reduced. Moderately powerful passives such as Thaumaturge, Precise Strikes, and Bastion remain the same. Weaker, more niche passives such as Expert Defender, Sprinter, or Bashing Focus have had their end-point values increased. Below is a list of all Champion abilities and their new 100-point values:
15%: Hardy, Elemental Defender, Quick Recovery, Siphoner, Mooncalf, Arcanist, Health, Tenacity, Tumbling, Blessed, Elemental Expert, Mighty
25%: Ironclad, Thick Skinned, Bastion, Warlord, Shadow Ward, Elfborn, Shattering Blows, Master-at-Arms, Thaumaturge, Precise Strikes
35%: Expert Defender, Sprinter, Bashing Focus, Shade, Physical Weapon Expert, Staff Expert
55%: Befoul
5280: Spell Shield, Light Armor Focus, Medium Armor Focus, Heavy Armor Focus, Spell Erosion, Piercing
1650: Resistant
In order to lower the gap between players with high and low CP, all Champion passive values are now significantly more frontloaded. This means that earlier points are worth much more, while later points are worth much less. In general, at the halfway mark of 50 points invested, you will obtain roughly 75% of an individual Champion ability’s total bonus (for example, at 50 points invested in Thaumaturge, you will have an 18.75% bonus to your damage over time effects). This new value curve also applies to the Health, Magicka, and Stamina gains by investing in the red, blue, and green constellations.
This change is designed to discourage allotting all of your Champion Points into any single star, and should encourage more varied and interesting Champion Point spending. You can still choose to invest 100 points into a particular passive, but it comes at a much larger opportunity cost of not investing points elsewhere. This also means players with lower CP will see better initial returns and will not be quite as far behind a player with much higher CP.
Swapped the Evocation and Recovery passives in the Skill Line window.
Evocation: This is now a 2-point passive, originally 3-points. It now reduces the cost of your Magicka abilities by 1/2% per piece of Light Armor, down from 1/2/3%.
Recovery: This is now a 3-point passive, originally 2-points. It now increases your Magicka Recovery by 2/3/4% per piece of Light Armor, instead of 2/4%.
Medium Armor
Wind Walker: This passive ability now reduces the cost of your Stamina abilities by 1/2% per piece of Medium Armor, down from 2/3%.
Heavy Armor
Constitution: Reduced the Magicka and Stamina restored by this passive ability by approximately 42%.
The Champion System has received three major rebalancing efforts this update:
Categorized and standardized the 100-point values
Made the passive values more frontloaded
Adjusted and redesigned several passives so there is now a counter to each major category of Champion passive
First, to improve diversity in points spent, many Champion ability 100-point values have been adjusted. Stronger, more globally-useful passives such as Mighty, Quick Recovery, and Mooncalf have had their end-point values reduced. Moderately powerful passives such as Thaumaturge, Precise Strikes, and Bastion remain the same. Weaker, more niche passives such as Expert Defender, Sprinter, or Bashing Focus have had their end-point values increased. Below is a list of all Champion abilities and their new 100-point values:
15%: Hardy, Elemental Defender, Quick Recovery, Siphoner, Mooncalf, Arcanist, Health, Tenacity, Tumbling, Blessed, Elemental Expert, Mighty
25%: Ironclad, Thick Skinned, Bastion, Warlord, Shadow Ward, Elfborn, Shattering Blows, Master-at-Arms, Thaumaturge, Precise Strikes
35%: Expert Defender, Sprinter, Bashing Focus, Shade, Physical Weapon Expert, Staff Expert
55%: Befoul
5280: Spell Shield, Light Armor Focus, Medium Armor Focus, Heavy Armor Focus, Spell Erosion, Piercing
1650: Resistant
In order to lower the gap between players with high and low CP, all Champion passive values are now significantly more frontloaded. This means that earlier points are worth much more, while later points are worth much less. In general, at the halfway mark of 50 points invested, you will obtain roughly 75% of an individual Champion ability’s total bonus (for example, at 50 points invested in Thaumaturge, you will have an 18.75% bonus to your damage over time effects). This new value curve also applies to the Health, Magicka, and Stamina gains by investing in the red, blue, and green constellations.
This change is designed to discourage allotting all of your Champion Points into any single star, and should encourage more varied and interesting Champion Point spending. You can still choose to invest 100 points into a particular passive, but it comes at a much larger opportunity cost of not investing points elsewhere. This also means players with lower CP will see better initial returns and will not be quite as far behind a player with much higher CP.
How could such drastic changes be made if "hard data" was being used all along?
@ZOS_GinaBruno
@ZOS_RichLambert
Edit: Updated on 3/28/18 to again question the decision making that led to the Morrowind sustain changes. Players have since adapted, including myself, but I still think that game play was more fun before the sustain changes.
Edit: Updated on 5/8/18 to tag @ZOS_Holden , who has been great in responding to feedback and interacting with the community.
Edit: Updated on 5/23/18. It's been almost a year since the drastic Morrowind sustain changes, and this question still hasn't been answered.
17
-
Bonzodog01✭✭✭✭✭When they first designed the CP system, they had no Hard Data at all to go on. All they could do was design the system from scratch, put it on the test servers, and work it out from there.
Effectively, its taken >1 year to actually test out the CP system. No other MMO has ever designed a system like this.
From the very beginning, it was going to be hard to predict how the player base would utilise the CP system, and what the outcome would be. All the could do was design something that worked in theory, put it up, and give it a year or so to see what happened.
It was eventually discovered that it was causing almost infinte sustain, and making the combat stale and overpowered, it was causing problems server side with far too much data for the servers to process in PvP, so they reduced it, put in waypoints (so the server only worked off those waypoints and nothing else) , and are now waiting to see if this has improved the situation.
I don't think it has - the lag really got worse after they introduced the proc sets and extended range of proc Monster sets. I think that they now need to do something about them, but short of removing them altogether from the game, I cannot see a solution.Xbox One - EU - EP/DCTrying and failing to hold the walls of his Templar house up since 20155 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Bonzodog01 wrote: »When they first designed the CP system, they had no Hard Data at all to go on. All they could do was design the system from scratch, put it on the test servers, and work it out from there.
Effectively, its taken >1 year to actually test out the CP system. No other MMO has ever designed a system like this.
From the very beginning, it was going to be hard to predict how the player base would utilise the CP system, and what the outcome would be. All the could do was design something that worked in theory, put it up, and give it a year or so to see what happened.
It was eventually discovered that it was causing almost infinte sustain, and making the combat stale and overpowered, it was causing problems server side with far too much data for the servers to process in PvP, so they reduced it, put in waypoints (so the server only worked off those waypoints and nothing else) , and are now waiting to see if this has improved the situation.
I don't think it has - the lag really got worse after they introduced the proc sets and extended range of proc Monster sets. I think that they now need to do something about them, but short of removing them altogether from the game, I cannot see a solution.
Is your first sentence suggesting that they never tested the CP system before putting it on PTS and then eventually officially putting it into the game?5 -
Bonzodog01✭✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »When they first designed the CP system, they had no Hard Data at all to go on. All they could do was design the system from scratch, put it on the test servers, and work it out from there.
Effectively, its taken >1 year to actually test out the CP system. No other MMO has ever designed a system like this.
From the very beginning, it was going to be hard to predict how the player base would utilise the CP system, and what the outcome would be. All the could do was design something that worked in theory, put it up, and give it a year or so to see what happened.
It was eventually discovered that it was causing almost infinte sustain, and making the combat stale and overpowered, it was causing problems server side with far too much data for the servers to process in PvP, so they reduced it, put in waypoints (so the server only worked off those waypoints and nothing else) , and are now waiting to see if this has improved the situation.
I don't think it has - the lag really got worse after they introduced the proc sets and extended range of proc Monster sets. I think that they now need to do something about them, but short of removing them altogether from the game, I cannot see a solution.
Is your first sentence suggesting that they never tested the CP system before putting it on PTS and then eventually officially putting it into the game?
Well, there is only so much internal testing you can do with a system. Of course, it held up, and it worked internally, but that was with maybe a dozen people testing it.
See, the CP was designed for large numbers of people to use, so all they could do was expose it to the playerbase and cross their fingers. Also, they never keep something on the PTS for too long - maybe 3 months max. In those 3 months, it exposed a few bugs, but nothing serious, and time had run out. So, put it on live and "test" it for a good year or so.
Only now are they finally able to really see the output, have a decent amount of Hard data to go with, and only now can they really start making the system work for everyone. Its going to take an extensive amount of work, but I think in the end, it will all work out.Xbox One - EU - EP/DCTrying and failing to hold the walls of his Templar house up since 20151 -
AlienatedGoat✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I just want to know what "hard data" made them think that turning Warlord from a stamina cost reduction passive into a break-free reduction was a good idea. They must've been high.PC-NA Goat - Bleat Bleat Baaaa9 -
sadownik✭✭✭✭✭
✭@Bonzodog01 you are delusional, thats it. The CP system from day 1 on PTS was deemed as massive power creep problem, which was so obvious i highly doubt anyone at ZOS thought about it even a minute. Sure enough very soon CP were restricted but still the difference in power between low cp and high cp is still very big.
Its not about bugs its about most basic MMO design problems that were omitted by AAA MMO developer.10 -
AlienatedGoat✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@Bonzodog01 you are delusional, thats it.
You should try to find other ways to disagree with people. Calling them crazy because they say something you don't agree with just makes you look like an ass.PC-NA Goat - Bleat Bleat Baaaa13 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Bonzodog01 wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »When they first designed the CP system, they had no Hard Data at all to go on. All they could do was design the system from scratch, put it on the test servers, and work it out from there.
Effectively, its taken >1 year to actually test out the CP system. No other MMO has ever designed a system like this.
From the very beginning, it was going to be hard to predict how the player base would utilise the CP system, and what the outcome would be. All the could do was design something that worked in theory, put it up, and give it a year or so to see what happened.
It was eventually discovered that it was causing almost infinte sustain, and making the combat stale and overpowered, it was causing problems server side with far too much data for the servers to process in PvP, so they reduced it, put in waypoints (so the server only worked off those waypoints and nothing else) , and are now waiting to see if this has improved the situation.
I don't think it has - the lag really got worse after they introduced the proc sets and extended range of proc Monster sets. I think that they now need to do something about them, but short of removing them altogether from the game, I cannot see a solution.
Is your first sentence suggesting that they never tested the CP system before putting it on PTS and then eventually officially putting it into the game?
Well, there is only so much internal testing you can do with a system. Of course, it held up, and it worked internally, but that was with maybe a dozen people testing it.
See, the CP was designed for large numbers of people to use, so all they could do was expose it to the playerbase and cross their fingers. Also, they never keep something on the PTS for too long - maybe 3 months max. In those 3 months, it exposed a few bugs, but nothing serious, and time had run out. So, put it on live and "test" it for a good year or so.
Only now are they finally able to really see the output, have a decent amount of Hard data to go with, and only now can they really start making the system work for everyone. Its going to take an extensive amount of work, but I think in the end, it will all work out.
ZOS surely must have had access to hard data before the CP system was introduced. That is what has me so skeptical.
They knew how the game played without CP, but then still decided to go ahead and release CP nodes with cost reduction up to 16% - only to then later completely wipe those nodes out. Toss in some of the armor passive changes and we're talking a 23% cost reduction for some builds that just went poof - and that's before even considering regen reductions to CP and armor.
Very much a head-scratcher to me.4 -
SanTii.92✭✭✭✭✭
✭I don't undertand this post. A lot of systems gets revamped and overhauled, and will continue to do so. What the use or not of "hard data" got to do with anything?When the snows fall and the white winds blow,
the lone wolf dies, but the pack survives.
Arg | Pc Na | Factionless Mag Warden.0 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭I don't undertand this post. A lot of systems gets revamped and overhauled, and will continue to do so. What the use or not of "hard data" got to do with anything?
Consider this. What data is ZOS using that tells them to implement 16% cost reduction CP nodes, only to then completely remove them from the game, along with other sustain nerfs?
We're talking about numbers as high as 23% cost reduction that go completely out the window in this update. Do you understand how drastic of a difference that is? And that's only cost reduction - we're not even talking about nerfs to regen that also fit into the sustain category.4 -
SanTii.92✭✭✭✭✭
✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I don't undertand this post. A lot of systems gets revamped and overhauled, and will continue to do so. What the use or not of "hard data" got to do with anything?
Consider this. What data is ZOS using that tells them to implement 16% cost reduction CP nodes, only to then completely remove them from the game, along with other sustain nerfs?
We're talking about numbers as high as 23% cost reduction that go completely out the window in this update. Do you understand how drastic of a difference that is? And that's only cost reduction - we're not even talking about nerfs to regen that also fit into the sustain category.
Originally cp was introduced over an year ago. A lot have happend in between, and at that time made sense, as it does now to take them out.
Maybe next time before starting a topic like this you'll want to present your own data to creat an actual compelling argument. Cheers.When the snows fall and the white winds blow,
the lone wolf dies, but the pack survives.
Arg | Pc Na | Factionless Mag Warden.0 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I don't undertand this post. A lot of systems gets revamped and overhauled, and will continue to do so. What the use or not of "hard data" got to do with anything?
Consider this. What data is ZOS using that tells them to implement 16% cost reduction CP nodes, only to then completely remove them from the game, along with other sustain nerfs?
We're talking about numbers as high as 23% cost reduction that go completely out the window in this update. Do you understand how drastic of a difference that is? And that's only cost reduction - we're not even talking about nerfs to regen that also fit into the sustain category.
Originally cp was introduced over an year ago. A lot have happend in between, and at that time made sense, as it does now to take them out.
Maybe next time before starting a topic like this you'll want to present your own data to creat an actual compelling argument. Cheers.
Haha mhm, and what is your argument saying? There is nothing to your argument that says CP made sense at the time, nor that it makes sense to change it in Morrowind. Not sure where you're going with this one. Cheers back?6 -
Bonzodog01✭✭✭✭✭It took over a full year of CP usage before they realised that the 16% raise was causing some very serious problems. The prime cause for lowering the effect that CP has is PvP and Cyrodiil.
Everything you are seeing is a huge attempt to nullify lag in Cyrodiils PvP campaigns.
They realised that the CP was overpowered in a lot of ways, and people were able to create infinite sustain. That in itself WAS NOT how the system was designed. It was creating problems in PvP combat, and duelling.
Also, it was making PvE too easy. The trials were becoming too easy. The elitists and PvP'ers created a massive uproar about how it was becoming possible to faceroll even the hard content due to near infinite sustain.
Then there was the no-CP week, in which they proved that not using CP in Cyrodiil reduced ping greatly.
However it hasn't entirely worked.
It is now believed that the additional server-side calculations caused by the proc sets are causing even greater lag than the CP alone. It might be time to review Proc sets (Monster sets included) part in the game and maybe consider removing them.
Xbox One - EU - EP/DCTrying and failing to hold the walls of his Templar house up since 20152 -
Dantaria✭✭✭✭✭
LOLWUT?! WUT?!Bonzodog01 wrote: »Also, it was making PvE too easy. The trials were becoming too easy. The elitists and PvP'ers created a massive uproar about how it was becoming possible to faceroll even the hard content due to near infinite sustain.
PvEers never complaned about infinite sustain. There never was infinite sustain! Only very good sustain in very, awesomely coordinated groups!
Ffs, where that even came from?!
PvEers complained about damage. About petsorcs who could parse 45k on skele and 60k+ in raid. About stamina being non-existant in trials.
Noone ever complained about sustain. Because - breaking news! - people actually liked mashing buttons. Yes, yes - you used your rotation, got fun flashy fights, got dynamic combat - and people loved it.
What we didn't love was the fact that for most efficiency it was petsorc or gtfo. And magDKs, of course. For chaining.
Did they add diversity? Well, kinda. You can see magblades in trials now. Only petsorc still hits like a truck and sorcs are still very desirable in trials as DD.
Stamina? Pffffffff. Yes, yes, it's better this patch, don't talk numbers to me, I know them. But breaking news! "Stacking preventing" mechanics are still there. Mage in AA, Ra-Kotu in HR, first MoL boss and Black Twin. You still can't make full stamina team and have some awesome fun, because game is still unfriendly to any other composition than "mostly rdds".
Butchering pace for the sake of lower numbers was the most stupid solution noone ever asked for! The problems people actually wanted to see fixed? Nah. Still there.
PvE had infinite sustain. And people complained about it. Yeah. Aha.
Stop. Just stop.English isn't my native, apologies for any mistakes.17 -
Krayzie✭✭✭✭✭
LOLWUT?! WUT?!Bonzodog01 wrote: »Also, it was making PvE too easy. The trials were becoming too easy. The elitists and PvP'ers created a massive uproar about how it was becoming possible to faceroll even the hard content due to near infinite sustain.
PvEers never complaned about infinite sustain. There never was infinite sustain! Only very good sustain in very, awesomely coordinated groups!
Ffs, where that even came from?!
PvEers complained about damage. About petsorcs who could parse 45k on skele and 60k+ in raid. About stamina being non-existant in trials.
Noone ever complained about sustain. Because - breaking news! - people actually liked mashing buttons. Yes, yes - you used your rotation, got fun flashy fights, got dynamic combat - and people loved it.
What we didn't love was the fact that for most efficiency it was petsorc or gtfo. And magDKs, of course. For chaining.
Did they add diversity? Well, kinda. You can see magblades in trials now. Only petsorc still hits like a truck and sorcs are still very desirable in trials as DD.
Stamina? Pffffffff. Yes, yes, it's better this patch, don't talk numbers to me, I know them. But breaking news! "Stacking preventing" mechanics are still there. Mage in AA, Ra-Kotu in HR, first MoL boss and Black Twin. You still can't make full stamina team and have some awesome fun, because game is still unfriendly to any other composition than "mostly rdds".
Butchering pace for the sake of lower numbers was the most stupid solution noone ever asked for! The problems people actually wanted to see fixed? Nah. Still there.
PvE had infinite sustain. And people complained about it. Yeah. Aha.
Stop. Just stop.
GGI'm a PVE roleplayer concerned about my vampires stage 4 skin tone and keep getting load screens so I came here to distract people from major issues with a rant thread about my characters cosmetic appearance.4 -
Zer0oo✭✭✭✭✭
✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I don't undertand this post. A lot of systems gets revamped and overhauled, and will continue to do so. What the use or not of "hard data" got to do with anything?
Consider this. What data is ZOS using that tells them to implement 16% cost reduction CP nodes, only to then completely remove them from the game, along with other sustain nerfs?
We're talking about numbers as high as 23% cost reduction that go completely out the window in this update. Do you understand how drastic of a difference that is? And that's only cost reduction - we're not even talking about nerfs to regen that also fit into the sustain category.
Originally cp was introduced over an year ago. A lot have happend in between, and at that time made sense, as it does now to take them out.
Maybe next time before starting a topic like this you'll want to present your own data to creat an actual compelling argument. Cheers.
Funny to see always the same ppl defending that mess that ZOS made out of the game.
- Update 23Ice Furnace: This item set now grants Spell Damage, rather than Weapon Damage for the 4 piece bonus10 -
Zer0oo✭✭✭✭✭
✭
LOLWUT?! WUT?!Bonzodog01 wrote: »Also, it was making PvE too easy. The trials were becoming too easy. The elitists and PvP'ers created a massive uproar about how it was becoming possible to faceroll even the hard content due to near infinite sustain.
PvEers never complaned about infinite sustain. There never was infinite sustain! Only very good sustain in very, awesomely coordinated groups!
Ffs, where that even came from?!
PvEers complained about damage. About petsorcs who could parse 45k on skele and 60k+ in raid. About stamina being non-existant in trials.
Noone ever complained about sustain. Because - breaking news! - people actually liked mashing buttons. Yes, yes - you used your rotation, got fun flashy fights, got dynamic combat - and people loved it.
What we didn't love was the fact that for most efficiency it was petsorc or gtfo. And magDKs, of course. For chaining.
Did they add diversity? Well, kinda. You can see magblades in trials now. Only petsorc still hits like a truck and sorcs are still very desirable in trials as DD.
Stamina? Pffffffff. Yes, yes, it's better this patch, don't talk numbers to me, I know them. But breaking news! "Stacking preventing" mechanics are still there. Mage in AA, Ra-Kotu in HR, first MoL boss and Black Twin. You still can't make full stamina team and have some awesome fun, because game is still unfriendly to any other composition than "mostly rdds".
Butchering pace for the sake of lower numbers was the most stupid solution noone ever asked for! The problems people actually wanted to see fixed? Nah. Still there.
PvE had infinite sustain. And people complained about it. Yeah. Aha.
Stop. Just stop.
I agree on most of the points. You could only substain(mag dd) when your healer did a good job, maybe it was alittle to easy. Now with morrowind they killed that part of the healer job, if you run out of res do more heavy attacks. That was an absolut stupid change.
Also most mag dds could actually get close to the dps of a pet sorc, it was just that they had so much cleave damage.
- Update 23Ice Furnace: This item set now grants Spell Damage, rather than Weapon Damage for the 4 piece bonus0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »When they first designed the CP system, they had no Hard Data at all to go on. All they could do was design the system from scratch, put it on the test servers, and work it out from there.
Effectively, its taken >1 year to actually test out the CP system. No other MMO has ever designed a system like this.
From the very beginning, it was going to be hard to predict how the player base would utilise the CP system, and what the outcome would be. All the could do was design something that worked in theory, put it up, and give it a year or so to see what happened.
It was eventually discovered that it was causing almost infinte sustain, and making the combat stale and overpowered, it was causing problems server side with far too much data for the servers to process in PvP, so they reduced it, put in waypoints (so the server only worked off those waypoints and nothing else) , and are now waiting to see if this has improved the situation.
I don't think it has - the lag really got worse after they introduced the proc sets and extended range of proc Monster sets. I think that they now need to do something about them, but short of removing them altogether from the game, I cannot see a solution.
Is your first sentence suggesting that they never tested the CP system before putting it on PTS and then eventually officially putting it into the game?
It is easy to see that Zos really had no clue how CP would affect the game when it was added to the game about 2.5 years ago (yes, it has been that long) It was not capped as we have it now and the devs expected the average player would have earned every single 3600 CP within about 2 years
The PTS (1.6) that introduced CP had template characters with all 3600 points so Zos could see the full affect it would have though it is questionable how much data Zos gathered. Probabaly very little though Zos has seemed to look at data a little skewed/analyzing it from the wrong approach based on some information they have posted.
The bigger issue is Zos has found it challenging to manage this game. Case in point, about a year ago we had 175 pts to put in each area. For sustain most placed 100 pts into cost reduction and 75 into regen. That next 25 points was hit hard with by the reduced benefit of each point and added very little. Damage was increased a little bit more since we often have points spread out into more than 2 areas.
The point, most of the changes over the past year were directly do to changes the Combat team made to the game. Just a few examples relating to damage, minor vulnerability via IA, the debuff from Alkosh and more recently the debuffs from WoE via the lightning staff provides going beyond minor vulnerability which made the CP passives Exploiter very useful. Even with sustain, changes occurred with each patch. We noticed decreases and increases which overall lead to better sustain which was mostly due to changes made by the combat team which changed builds and rotations.
That was just a short list that does not even include changes they made to skills and other aspects of combat.
So I agree that Zos does not seem to see any big picture when managing the game.
Edit: Further, before U14 it took a decently coordinated group for infinite sustain to occur in PvP. Of course I am talking about build that were designed for max damage, not damage builds that used Seducer. That just points out that they are not lowering the high end and raising the low end since groups that had issues with sustain before will have greater issues with it now.Edited by idk on July 1, 2017 10:22PM5 -
Cryptical✭✭✭✭✭
✭There was hard data on cost reduction, in the form of the jewelry glyphs. But they were of limited worth when extrapolated to the cp tree.
Then there was hard data on cp tree cost reduction, in the form of the test server. But that place seems to be a ghost town compared to the live server, so it really wasn't put through the paces by the pc platform crowd.
Then there was hard data gathered on the live servers. But with the large number of other things also being adjusted and changed, it becomes much more complicated to factor out the impacts of those other changes in order to come to a definite conclusion on the exact magnitude of the problem with cost reduction cp tree.
Remember, they needed to do a double ap pvp event to test the theories with hard evidence.Xbox NA0 -
zaria✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Its an good chance this is true,GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »When they first designed the CP system, they had no Hard Data at all to go on. All they could do was design the system from scratch, put it on the test servers, and work it out from there.
Effectively, its taken >1 year to actually test out the CP system. No other MMO has ever designed a system like this.
From the very beginning, it was going to be hard to predict how the player base would utilise the CP system, and what the outcome would be. All the could do was design something that worked in theory, put it up, and give it a year or so to see what happened.
It was eventually discovered that it was causing almost infinte sustain, and making the combat stale and overpowered, it was causing problems server side with far too much data for the servers to process in PvP, so they reduced it, put in waypoints (so the server only worked off those waypoints and nothing else) , and are now waiting to see if this has improved the situation.
I don't think it has - the lag really got worse after they introduced the proc sets and extended range of proc Monster sets. I think that they now need to do something about them, but short of removing them altogether from the game, I cannot see a solution.
Is your first sentence suggesting that they never tested the CP system before putting it on PTS and then eventually officially putting it into the game?
it would be pretty trivial to just do some theory crafting on an internal test server and see that you ended up with.
Yes you would miss some of the more obscure synergies but having player go for cost reduction until they can sustain then go for damage all out is pretty obvious.
As for proc sets they became an problem with the no cp pvp,
So weird, the old issue was unkillable tanks the current is enemies who kill you.
Someone see an pattern here. Then doing an change go all overboard, like an very drunk guy taking an shower and only got ice cold or boiling water for some reason.
Competence level of an very bad pug.
Grinding just make you go in circles.
Asking ZoS for nerfs is as stupid as asking for close air support from the death star.0 -
zaria✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Think the double AP was more about testing if no cp pvp worked, it did as we see more of it.There was hard data on cost reduction, in the form of the jewelry glyphs. But they were of limited worth when extrapolated to the cp tree.
Then there was hard data on cp tree cost reduction, in the form of the test server. But that place seems to be a ghost town compared to the live server, so it really wasn't put through the paces by the pc platform crowd.
Then there was hard data gathered on the live servers. But with the large number of other things also being adjusted and changed, it becomes much more complicated to factor out the impacts of those other changes in order to come to a definite conclusion on the exact magnitude of the problem with cost reduction cp tree.
Remember, they needed to do a double ap pvp event to test the theories with hard evidence.
neither cp nor proc set cause lag in pvp, cp is fairly simple buffs like passives, refusing you to change them during pvp and they could be rolled up with skill and racials.
If anything its aoe who generate lag, you have to determine if player is inside all the various aoe areas if he would get benefit or damage and if so how much.
And it all has to be done on server to avoid cheating, you get over 10 new aoe effects every second in an zerg fight this while players are moving around. to, i have no idea how to even calculate it.
Grinding just make you go in circles.
Asking ZoS for nerfs is as stupid as asking for close air support from the death star.1 -
CaptainBeerDude✭✭✭✭✭
Its an good chance this is true,GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »When they first designed the CP system, they had no Hard Data at all to go on. All they could do was design the system from scratch, put it on the test servers, and work it out from there.
Effectively, its taken >1 year to actually test out the CP system. No other MMO has ever designed a system like this.
From the very beginning, it was going to be hard to predict how the player base would utilise the CP system, and what the outcome would be. All the could do was design something that worked in theory, put it up, and give it a year or so to see what happened.
It was eventually discovered that it was causing almost infinte sustain, and making the combat stale and overpowered, it was causing problems server side with far too much data for the servers to process in PvP, so they reduced it, put in waypoints (so the server only worked off those waypoints and nothing else) , and are now waiting to see if this has improved the situation.
I don't think it has - the lag really got worse after they introduced the proc sets and extended range of proc Monster sets. I think that they now need to do something about them, but short of removing them altogether from the game, I cannot see a solution.
Is your first sentence suggesting that they never tested the CP system before putting it on PTS and then eventually officially putting it into the game?
it would be pretty trivial to just do some theory crafting on an internal test server and see that you ended up with.
Yes you would miss some of the more obscure synergies but having player go for cost reduction until they can sustain then go for damage all out is pretty obvious.
As for proc sets they became an problem with the no cp pvp,
So weird, the old issue was unkillable tanks the current is enemies who kill you.
Someone see an pattern here. Then doing an change go all overboard, like an very drunk guy taking an shower and only got ice cold or boiling water for some reason.
Competence level of an very bad pug.
LOL. I'm not sure you've ever been in a very bad PUG...0 -
SanTii.92✭✭✭✭✭
✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I don't undertand this post. A lot of systems gets revamped and overhauled, and will continue to do so. What the use or not of "hard data" got to do with anything?
Consider this. What data is ZOS using that tells them to implement 16% cost reduction CP nodes, only to then completely remove them from the game, along with other sustain nerfs?
We're talking about numbers as high as 23% cost reduction that go completely out the window in this update. Do you understand how drastic of a difference that is? And that's only cost reduction - we're not even talking about nerfs to regen that also fit into the sustain category.
Originally cp was introduced over an year ago. A lot have happend in between, and at that time made sense, as it does now to take them out.
Maybe next time before starting a topic like this you'll want to present your own data to creat an actual compelling argument. Cheers.
Funny to see always the same ppl defending that mess that ZOS made out of the game.
I defend no one, I just call out lazy, poorly thought arguments. OP's is that since Zos claims to balance based on "hard data", a year + system shouldn't be overhauled. That's just absurd.When the snows fall and the white winds blow,
the lone wolf dies, but the pack survives.
Arg | Pc Na | Factionless Mag Warden.1 -
Doctordarkspawn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Bonzodog01 wrote: »It took over a full year of CP usage before they realised that the 16% raise was causing some very serious problems. The prime cause for lowering the effect that CP has is PvP and Cyrodiil.
Everything you are seeing is a huge attempt to nullify lag in Cyrodiils PvP campaigns.
They realised that the CP was overpowered in a lot of ways, and people were able to create infinite sustain. That in itself WAS NOT how the system was designed. It was creating problems in PvP combat, and duelling.
Also, it was making PvE too easy. The trials were becoming too easy. The elitists and PvP'ers created a massive uproar about how it was becoming possible to faceroll even the hard content due to near infinite sustain.
Then there was the no-CP week, in which they proved that not using CP in Cyrodiil reduced ping greatly.
However it hasn't entirely worked.
It is now believed that the additional server-side calculations caused by the proc sets are causing even greater lag than the CP alone. It might be time to review Proc sets (Monster sets included) part in the game and maybe consider removing them.
Nobody complained that it was 'too easy' besides darksouls fanatics. CP was not overpowered. What it did, and what the designers created with it, was a fast paced combat system that, while repetative to some, is a damn sight less repetative then the burn/recovery phases we have now.
Fact is, if this was all a hate for the lag, ZOS created the lag. By streamlining the damage calculations more than the original team intended, they greatly increased server load, for, as far as I can tell, very little increase in depth or time spent on content.
In fact, the more you look at it, the better off this game would have been the less and less ZOS tried to run from that original design, not farther and farther. And now their causing even more damage attempting to fix the mistakes their inability to think things through caused.
The dev team has no idea how to clean up their own mess, and I suspect they've screwed the system to the point where no team is going to make headway. Hence why I've run for Secret World Legends, a game that does many of the concepts this game tries now (INCLUDING ATTACK LIMITING) in a much better way.Edited by Doctordarkspawn on July 1, 2017 11:35PM3 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I don't undertand this post. A lot of systems gets revamped and overhauled, and will continue to do so. What the use or not of "hard data" got to do with anything?
Consider this. What data is ZOS using that tells them to implement 16% cost reduction CP nodes, only to then completely remove them from the game, along with other sustain nerfs?
We're talking about numbers as high as 23% cost reduction that go completely out the window in this update. Do you understand how drastic of a difference that is? And that's only cost reduction - we're not even talking about nerfs to regen that also fit into the sustain category.
Originally cp was introduced over an year ago. A lot have happend in between, and at that time made sense, as it does now to take them out.
Maybe next time before starting a topic like this you'll want to present your own data to creat an actual compelling argument. Cheers.
Funny to see always the same ppl defending that mess that ZOS made out of the game.
I defend no one, I just call out lazy, poorly thought arguments. OP's is that since Zos claims to balance based on "hard data", a year + system shouldn't be overhauled. That's just absurd.
Please, just stop. My "argument," as you call it, isn't even an argument... it's a question - read the first post of the thread. Who is being lazy and posting poorly thought out arguments here?Edited by GrumpyDuckling on July 2, 2017 12:22AM2 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »It took over a full year of CP usage before they realised that the 16% raise was causing some very serious problems. The prime cause for lowering the effect that CP has is PvP and Cyrodiil.
Everything you are seeing is a huge attempt to nullify lag in Cyrodiils PvP campaigns.
They realised that the CP was overpowered in a lot of ways, and people were able to create infinite sustain. That in itself WAS NOT how the system was designed. It was creating problems in PvP combat, and duelling.
Also, it was making PvE too easy. The trials were becoming too easy. The elitists and PvP'ers created a massive uproar about how it was becoming possible to faceroll even the hard content due to near infinite sustain.
Then there was the no-CP week, in which they proved that not using CP in Cyrodiil reduced ping greatly.
However it hasn't entirely worked.
It is now believed that the additional server-side calculations caused by the proc sets are causing even greater lag than the CP alone. It might be time to review Proc sets (Monster sets included) part in the game and maybe consider removing them.
Nobody complained that it was 'too easy' besides darksouls fanatics. CP was not overpowered. What it did, and what the designers created with it, was a fast paced combat system that, while repetative to some, is a damn sight less repetative then the burn/recovery phases we have now.
Fact is, if this was all a hate for the lag, ZOS created the lag. By streamlining the damage calculations more than the original team intended, they greatly increased server load, for, as far as I can tell, very little increase in depth or time spent on content.
In fact, the more you look at it, the better off this game would have been the less and less ZOS tried to run from that original design, not farther and farther. And now their causing even more damage attempting to fix the mistakes their inability to think things through caused.
The dev team has no idea how to clean up their own mess, and I suspect they've screwed the system to the point where no team is going to make headway. Hence why I've run for Secret World Legends, a game that does many of the concepts this game tries now (INCLUDING ATTACK LIMITING) in a much better way.
The burn/recovery phases we have now have made game play less fun, especially for players who were able to enjoy playing during better sustain periods pre-Morrowind.
To me it's like the equivalent to playing basketball but being forced to take a break after every shot attempt. It's like ZOS is saying, "Sorry, but we decided it would be better for you if you don't have enough energy to keep having fun. Sit down, rest for a bit, then you can keep having fun as long as you rest between each shot. I know that you preferred being able to run up and down the court, playing for a while before you needed a rest, but this way now is much better, we say so."Edited by GrumpyDuckling on July 2, 2017 1:11PM6 -
Galwylin✭✭✭✭✭I think that you would have to make the assumption ZOS knows what they want the game to play like. They have no idea. They just have random unrelated thoughts they try out to see if they like then go right on to something else. I imagine they keep expecting this game to be 'finished' so they can do something else. Probably explains why this game has done nothing that brings anything new or interesting to the MMORPG genre.
3 -
O_LYKOS✭✭✭✭✭
✭Instead of "balancing" sustain sensibly they decided to hit every single point in the game that aids sustain and completely shred it. They could've just made the cp changes or change the passives. One or the other.
PC NA - GreggsSausageRoll0 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Instead of "balancing" sustain sensibly they decided to hit every single point in the game that aids sustain and completely shred it. They could've just made the cp changes or change the passives. One or the other.
Yeah it's the "shred" aspect of their decision that doesn't make sense with what they've told us in the past. What "hard data" are they using that tells them to, for example, create cost reduction CP nodes up to 16% and then later remove it altogether?
Just doesn't make sense.0 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭I think that you would have to make the assumption ZOS knows what they want the game to play like. They have no idea. They just have random unrelated thoughts they try out to see if they like then go right on to something else. I imagine they keep expecting this game to be 'finished' so they can do something else. Probably explains why this game has done nothing that brings anything new or interesting to the MMORPG genre.
That's a good point. One Tamriel is strong evidence that they have no idea what they want. It was a great update, but differs greatly from initial design of the game.1
