#1 Reason CP Campaigns are More Populated than Non-CP?

Karivaa

I have played since the game came out and worked hard for my cp. why would I want to go into a non cp campaign that is dead?

Dragon_Master

Sandman929 wrote: »

Balance decisions come primarily from PvP because PvP is where imbalance is revealed. We fight other people, not just scripted damage and static mechanics.

Which is fine, and this wasn't my way to slam PvP or anything. My point was that ZOS should really be focusing on balancing both, not just balance PvP and then tell PvE'ers to "hey, just figure it out".

I spend about 80% of my game play in PvE, and when skills are nerfed, sustain is nerfed, procs are nerfed, and all other things are nerfed, that's great for PvP balance, but it's not like they adjust trial bosses; those stay the same. I'm not sure which update it happened (probably Shadows of the Hist, but don't quote me), but ZOS made all PVE bosses more tanky with higher HP and increased resistances to throw a sustain wrench into the system. By making things stronger and tougher to kill, sustain would be a challenge, in PvE, which is fine. I like having to adjust stuff in PvE. But when they then added the additional wrench of the recent "no more reduction in cost CP tree" decision...they didn't then go back and adjust bosses, so PvE got the double whammy. So not only do monster sets not proc crit damage (which was helpful in trials), we have the double-hit for sustain, while all bosses are much tougher to kill. All because PvPers cried about not being able to 1v9 anymore.

So with the skill/CP updates, I think there are only one or two groups who have beaten the hard mode for the new veteran trial. I know, it says "hard mode" in the name, so it should be hard, but when player skills are nerfed so incredibly that entire builds are no longer viable in PvE content, that's a problem.

I've said this probably a million times, but this is why PvP skills need to be different from PvE skills, because the same skills across both realms doesn't really make much sense. The PvP crowd will always be chiriping about what needs to be nerfed, it'll happen, and there will be no consideration for how that effects PvE skills and ability to do the content.

Sandman929

Dragon_Master wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Balance decisions come primarily from PvP because PvP is where imbalance is revealed. We fight other people, not just scripted damage and static mechanics.

Which is fine, and this wasn't my way to slam PvP or anything. My point was that ZOS should really be focusing on balancing both, not just balance PvP and then tell PvE'ers to "hey, just figure it out".

I spend about 80% of my game play in PvE, and when skills are nerfed, sustain is nerfed, procs are nerfed, and all other things are nerfed, that's great for PvP balance, but it's not like they adjust trial bosses; those stay the same. I'm not sure which update it happened (probably Shadows of the Hist, but don't quote me), but ZOS made all PVE bosses more tanky with higher HP and increased resistances to throw a sustain wrench into the system. By making things stronger and tougher to kill, sustain would be a challenge, in PvE, which is fine. I like having to adjust stuff in PvE. But when they then added the additional wrench of the recent "no more reduction in cost CP tree" decision...they didn't then go back and adjust bosses, so PvE got the double whammy. So not only do monster sets not proc crit damage (which was helpful in trials), we have the double-hit for sustain, while all bosses are much tougher to kill. All because PvPers cried about not being able to 1v9 anymore.

So with the skill/CP updates, I think there are only one or two groups who have beaten the hard mode for the new veteran trial. I know, it says "hard mode" in the name, so it should be hard, but when player skills are nerfed so incredibly that entire builds are no longer viable in PvE content, that's a problem.

I've said this probably a million times, but this is why PvP skills need to be different from PvE skills, because the same skills across both realms doesn't really make much sense. The PvP crowd will always be chiriping about what needs to be nerfed, it'll happen, and there will be no consideration for how that effects PvE skills and ability to do the content.

But these sound like issues that should be addressed outside of the Alliance War & Imperial City forum. ZOS absolutely needs to reevaluate PvE content when making changes to skills, sets or sustain mechanics, but in a PvP forum we "chirp" about PvP imbalance.

Scyantific

The ONLY reason those changes you claim come from PvP is because casuals like you jump into PvP, get ruined by someone who actually knows what they're doing, and you then immediately run to the forums demanding nerfs to accommodate you.

Don't believe me? Here, have a list:

• AoE caps - Wrobel, Lambert and Wheeler have all gone on record saying that this was put in because they did not want small groups of experienced players ruining the PvP experience of larger, more casual players.
• Removal of Dynamic Ulti Gen - See AoE caps argument
• Proc Sets - Put in because casuals complained about not being able to take down defensively oriented players
• Poisons - See Proc Sets argument
• Adjusted Requirements for Vigor/Magicka Detonation/Caltrops - The AP amounts needed were adjusted because, again, casual players complained about needing to do PvP for stuff that wasn't even necessary for PvE.

Now on the flip-side:

• PvP players complained about the grinding needed to get undaunted helms. So we got the golden vendor. Which actually benefits both sides equally
• PvP players complained about ball zergs and how it was dumbing down the game. So we got Vicious Death and Destro Ult, which, again, ended up benefiting both the hardcore AND the casual crowd.

So, before you start complaining about how PvP balancing is ruining the PvE side of things, shut up and think about the type of player that's driving the changes we get. It's you, the PvE player who casually comes into PvP and gets wrecked by seasoned PvP veterans. It is one hundred percent on you guys that we get the changes that you're complaining about.

thankyourat

Dragon_Master wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Balance decisions come primarily from PvP because PvP is where imbalance is revealed. We fight other people, not just scripted damage and static mechanics.

Which is fine, and this wasn't my way to slam PvP or anything. My point was that ZOS should really be focusing on balancing both, not just balance PvP and then tell PvE'ers to "hey, just figure it out".

I spend about 80% of my game play in PvE, and when skills are nerfed, sustain is nerfed, procs are nerfed, and all other things are nerfed, that's great for PvP balance, but it's not like they adjust trial bosses; those stay the same. I'm not sure which update it happened (probably Shadows of the Hist, but don't quote me), but ZOS made all PVE bosses more tanky with higher HP and increased resistances to throw a sustain wrench into the system. By making things stronger and tougher to kill, sustain would be a challenge, in PvE, which is fine. I like having to adjust stuff in PvE. But when they then added the additional wrench of the recent "no more reduction in cost CP tree" decision...they didn't then go back and adjust bosses, so PvE got the double whammy. So not only do monster sets not proc crit damage (which was helpful in trials), we have the double-hit for sustain, while all bosses are much tougher to kill. All because PvPers cried about not being able to 1v9 anymore.

So with the skill/CP updates, I think there are only one or two groups who have beaten the hard mode for the new veteran trial. I know, it says "hard mode" in the name, so it should be hard, but when player skills are nerfed so incredibly that entire builds are no longer viable in PvE content, that's a problem.

I've said this probably a million times, but this is why PvP skills need to be different from PvE skills, because the same skills across both realms doesn't really make much sense. The PvP crowd will always be chiriping about what needs to be nerfed, it'll happen, and there will be no consideration for how that effects PvE skills and ability to do the content.

The only thing is a lot of pve content was too easy. i was soloing alot of vet dungeons. I think the problem with pve is that players have such varried skill levels. What's difficult to you might not be difficult to me and vice versa. In my opinion the proc set nerf and sustain nerfs were needed in pve more than pvp but that's just my opinion. I don't think those were pve nerfs because sustain is still really easy in pvp and proc sets are still broken. I think the devs were aiming at making pve content more difficult

NeillMcAttack

This thread has sadly gone way off topic. I'll indulge firstly be saying that I can not understand an active player that says "PvP is balanced around having CP". If this is true it's literally only true for the past number of weeks. Do I have to remind active players that we have only recently gotten a patch that removed some stars, added more PvP specific stars, re-adjusted the max values of stars, inserted stop gaps on stars, and heavily front loaded all stars to entice players to spread them around! So just stop with that nonsense argument.

As for non-CP being more imbalanced. Not one argument can claim this without mentioning proc sets. Maybe it's the lack of optimal scaling of proc sets that's causing this?! And remember that proc sets will still have complaints of overperforming in their current state regardless of wether a player has CP or not. Siege weapons, well, yeah, they hurt without the extra stats and mitigation. That is how they were designed long before CP, I guess now that players are used to shrugging them off they are suddenly too strong. It's not as if a big red warning isn't telling you to move, right?

Anyway, on to the topic.
I completely agree with the OP. Forgetting that NPC's are currently OP, they need to be somewhat challenging, instead of a mechanic that can be completely ignored granting the larger numbered group easy PvDooring. Saying that I wouldn't be against a major buff to them in the CP campaign as long as we get some consistency. Though I feel the only player that suffers then are those players more in-between min and max CP.

I don't think anyone can say it's easier to gain AP in non-cp, for a number of reasons, but one being the simple fact that NPC's are simply tougher to kill than in the CP campaign.

Jamini

Dragon_Master wrote: »

Which is fine, and this wasn't my way to slam PvP or anything. My point was that ZOS should really be focusing on balancing both, not just balance PvP and then tell PvE'ers to "hey, just figure it out".

The Proc Critical Nerf and Sustain nerf were both, very firmly, aimed at PvE, not PvP. The developers did not like that players were using purely DPS sets and burning through bosses without concern for resources, and adjusted the game accordingly.

PvP was also impacted, and to compensate ZoS included some adjustments to CP stars and poisons to mitigate the balance changes in those fields.