A comprehensive reason why racial passives should be changed.

Animus-ESO

IMO racial passives and racial bonuses can and should exist in games, but should be more focused on aspects which do not directly affect character power or combat effectiveness (like if a race is magical, maybe they perform crafting of enchantments better).
Some minor (+/- 1%) differences between races are ok, but when the difference between optimal and sub-optimal gets into the ranges seen in ESO, it creates a world where players feel shoehorned into playing specific race / class combinations instead of playing whatever they actually would choose absent combat benefits.
The game forces you to choose a specific race for certain roles .

Magicka DD > High Elf , Dunmer
Stamina DD > Redguard , Khajit , Orc , Imperial
Healer > Breton , High Elf , Argonian
Tank > Imperial , Argonian , Orc , Nord

Choosing these races will make a huge difference in terms of performance .

I am talking about 4-5k DPS difference . I am talking about not being able to sustain a build without being an Argonian . Running out of Stamina if you are not Redguard as Stamina DD .

Races are absurdly unbalanced at the moment . Of course there should be a difference between them but not this much .

Counter arguements:

Q: What would be the point of having races then?

A: Races have different stories. characters, lore, aesthetics, etc - there are plenty of reasons to have diverse races.

Q: (dead horse question) What would be the point of having races then?

A: These types of questions confuse me. If I choose to play a Magic Khajiit Templar, my racials are all but useless for that playstyle and for all intent and purpose may as well not exist since their benefits are virtually nonexistent anyways.

Q: Wouldn't that make race choice meaningless and reduce diversity?

There is plenty of choice in race vs attribute/passives.

My magicka characters are dunmer, altmer, Breton, and argonian.

My stam characters are khajiit, Imperial, Nord and Bosmer

They all do just fine, regardless of race.

A: Racial diversity is would NOT decrease if racials were changed or removed. The differences between an Altmer and Argonian are incredibly vast and not just passive wise. An Argonian looks NOTHING like an Altmer, typically lives in swamps and worships sentient trees. Altmer does NONE of that. So racial diversity is not an argument at all.

Also, lol at your examples as they all play within their shoehorned archetype, be it magic or stamina.

(DISCLAIMER, I've taken a lot of this from other threads. I just wanted to organize it in a meaningful way so maybe you turds can understand the logic.)

AlienatedGoat

Dapper Dinosaur

While many people will say "In this genre there have always been racial specialties/passives", and to those people, I say so what?

If racial passives were removed completely from characters and given to another set of "secondary" Mundus Stones or something like them, what would any possible downside of that be? All it would do is open up all character races to anyone that wanted to play them without shooting themselves in the foot and chopping off a hand before they even got started. I can pull 22k DPS parses on combat skeletons with my argonian mag DK when he doesn't even have his gear finalized, yes, but imagine how high that number would skyrocket if I could apply the Dunmer passive set to him?

There will be people that will just say "But then everyone would be pigeon-holed into using one specific set for their class with no variety allowed". That's Zenimax's fault for making racials so uneven, and if they were to go this route they would probably be giving them a sweeping pass to be more competitive with eachother for certain roles so you did actually have a choice.

Animus-ESO

Dapper Dinosaur wrote: »

While many people will say "In this genre there have always been racial specialties/passives", and to those people, I say so what?

If racial passives were removed completely from characters and given to another set of "secondary" Mundus Stones or something like them, what would any possible downside of that be? All it would do is open up all character races to anyone that wanted to play them without shooting themselves in the foot and chopping off a hand before they even got started. I can pull 22k DPS parses on combat skeletons with my argonian mag DK when he doesn't even have his gear finalized, yes, but imagine how high that number would skyrocket if I could apply the Dunmer passive set to him?

There will be people that will just say "But then everyone would be pigeon-holed into using one specific set for their class with no variety allowed". That's Zenimax's fault for making racials so uneven, and if they were to go this route they would probably be giving them a sweeping pass to be more competitive with eachother for certain roles so you did actually have a choice.

Very well said.

Animus-ESO

Phage wrote: »

Very PC of you

starkerealm

jasonthorpeb14_ESO wrote: »

Choosing these races will make a huge difference in terms of performance .

Bad idea.

I'm sorry, but, no, this one is a pretty terrible idea.

I understand the impulse, but when you start carving up the classes like this, you end up with two problems.

First, anyone who picks the "wrong" race because it looked cool, or whatever, is hosed. Now, you can get away with this in single player games, but when you're asking a new player to make a permanent decision about the effectiveness of their character, based on minimal information, before they've learned the game... that's not going to end well. Especially when you walk up and tell them, "hey, kid, I can fix this problem for $20."

Second, the races aren't balanced by alliance. I know, you carved them up that way, up there. But, when you've got an alliance that is all Damage Dealers, that's going to create some imbalances. Especially when you can't even roll up a tank for them without shelling out another $20. Now, granted, this is a PvP concern... but it is a serious PvP concern.

I mean, I respect the idea, and there's a legitimate goal there. But, I don't think this is the answer.

Pwnyridah

Keep passives, you must choose your path.

MehrunesFlagon

Getting rid of combat related passives is a terrible idea.

Apache_Kid

If you're talking about just straight up removing them but adding nothing then that's just about the worst idea I've ever heard. Now if you're telling me there's another way I can get those stat boosts instead of racial passives then we can talk.

But if you want to nerf all of our characters for the sake of unifomrity then you can miss me with that. You can either pick your favorite race for your little roleplay adventure time or pick the best race for your role/stats. You can't have both and nerf my characters.

Axoinus

Partially agree with OP. What OP describes is a problem only because DPS is the universal gage.

I think this is what the devs were trying to address with the sustain nerf...trying to push people away from DPS is king.

BlazingDynamo

Nah keep them. Also bring back the 1% permanent stat bonus you got for being emp. Love that kind of stuff.

starkerealm

Honestly, if I were designing the system from the ground up, I'd use the attributes from older Elder Scrolls games.

So, if Skyrim was your first introduction to Tamriel, let me explain:

Used to be, TES games had eight attributes. Strength, Intelligence, Willpower, Agility, Speed, Endurance, Personality, and Luck.

Each race (and gender) started with around 200 points distributed between them. Attributes ranged from 0 to 100 and would start at 40 in most cases. Some races would trade one stat for another, for example, Altmer would have lower Strength (starting at 30) in exchange for higher Intelligence (starting at 50). As you leveled up, you had the option to increase these stats, but the hard cap of 100 remained. You could exceed it with enchantments and alchemy, but there was an effective hardcap at how powerful a non-buffed character could be.

Now, there were some serious imbalances. Some attributes were simply more valuable than others.

That said, Elder Scrolls Legends has an abbreviated 5 attribute list. Personality, Speed, and Luck are gone. I can work with that.

Personality and Luck could be useful, but both would require substantial work. Personality would require extensive dialog rewrites, in order to make it viable, or give it a secondary effect that might mess with things. (For example, scaling healing with personality.)

So, Strength is your ability to hit things. It's also carry capacity, but we (probably) don't need that in ESO.

Intelligence is your aptitude for magicka, and governs your max magicka pool.

Willpower was your maximum fatigue (stamina), and your Magicka recovery rate (in Oblivion).

Agility governed range damage, stealth, and maximum fatigue (along with willpower).

Endurance governed your maximum health, and your maximum fatigue (so... now, three attributes piling into this particular circus).

That list isn't perfect, but we can work with it.

Strength could govern Melee Damage.
Intelligence could govern Spell Damage and Maximum Magicka.
Willpower could govern resource recovery (all three Resource Pools).
Endurance could govern Health.
Agility could govern max Stamina, ranged damage and Stealth.

The advantage here is, you could establish hard caps. You would know, immediately, if someone was exceeding a possible limit, for example. Ironically, it would probably be less confusing than the existing system for new players. It would also make the overall system easier to balance. If no one can exceed Strength x300 Weapon Damage, or Willpower x20 recovery, then you know exactly how many resources players will have normally. You can also design around elements like max possible health.

Most importantly, it would allow for greater diversity with races. A race that's naturally adept at something, would have an easier time filling in gaps, or more options to go hybrid.

Within this context, it would be possible to seed attributes that classes got bonuses to. For example, having the Refreshing Shadows passive grant Willpower.

Obviously, there's more elements than this, but the basic idea is that it would create a system where all of the races were given a unified ceiling, with multiple approaches to getting there.

Icy_Waffles

All they need to do is put racial passives under birthstones, let us pick a race foe aesthetics/ preference, and then choose a birthstone for passives.

Slick_007

would lore allow a dunmer tank? would they dare be the one to get hit? i dont think so. so your lore reasons for removing these are false.

Joy_Division

So the OP wants races to be cosmetic and yet another choice we have turned into a generic % available to everyone else so we are that much closer to carbon copies of each other?

No thanks.

Runs

Icy_Waffles wrote: »

All they need to do is put racial passives under birthstones, let us pick a race foe aesthetics/ preference, and then choose a birthstone for passives.

When they originally announced race changes were coming, I thought/hoped that's what they were going to do.

Katahdin

So people disagreed with you and you had to start a whole new thread and insult people in the process.
Repeating it again doesnt make your "logic" (opinion) any less flawed.

Well I disagreed in the other thread and I still disagree now. The passives are just fine.

The point of my examples, which you quoted was that for each attribute (stam or magicka) there are at least 4 races that can do well with either.

If there was such a lack of race diversity in the game because of passivies, as has been argued, we would see nothing but redguards for stam, altmer for magicka, and argonians for healers.

Look around the damn game and youll see that is not the case at all.

I have seen dunmer, argonian, Imperial and even Khajiit play both stamina and magicka characters. Argonians make great healers, but before they were buffed, who would have ever thought to see an argonian stamina tank? Ive seen it and it makes a great tank. Ive seen Khajiits play as a tank (both stam and magicka) and another one as a mag sorc as well. Those characters did just fine. That is hardly being "pigeon holed"

Some might say that the added stamina benefit of certain races may actually help a majicka character in terms of break free and dodge roll under certain circumstances with a slight loss to DPS but hardly the amount you are claiming.

The differences you call "huge" are making a mountain out of a mole hill. The differences are not really even worth worrying about unless you're an ultra min/maxer, in which case you'll probably never be happy anyway.
A better skilled player will still be a better skilled player regardless of the character's passives.

The game does not force you to do anything. The game gives you plenty of other ways to get things that are lacking in the passives.
For example, max stam/magicka, and regen can be gotten through the CP trees or with choice of enchantments or armor or with food/drinks.

Removing passives or making them ala carte will just dumb down the game and cause every stam character to be the same as every other stam character and every magicka character to be the same as every other magicka character because people will just pick whatever the best set of passives are for each.

ak_pvp

Katahdin wrote: »

So people disagreed with you and you had to start a whole new thread and insult people in the process.
Repeating it again doesnt make your "logic" (opinion) any less flawed.

Well I disagreed in the other thread and I still disagree now. The passives are just fine.

The point of my examples, which you quoted was that for each attribute (stam or magicka) there are at least 4 races that can do well with either.

If there was such a lack of race diversity in the game because of passivies, as has been argued, we would see nothing but redguards for stam, altmer for magicka, and argonians for healers.

Look around the damn game and youll see that is not the case at all.

I have seen dunmer, argonian, Imperial and even Khajiit play both stamina and magicka characters. Argonians make great healers, but before they were buffed, who would have ever thought to see an argonian stamina tank? Ive seen it and it makes a great tank. Ive seen Khajiits play as a tank (both stam and magicka) and another one as a mag sorc as well. Those characters did just fine. That is hardly being "pigeon holed"

Some might say that the added stamina benefit of certain races may actually help a majicka character in terms of break free and dodge roll under certain circumstances with a slight loss to DPS but hardly the amount you are claiming.

The differences you call "huge" are making a mountain out of a mole hill. The differences are not really even worth worrying about unless you're an ultra min/maxer, in which case you'll probably never be happy anyway.
A better skilled player will still be a better skilled player regardless of the character's passives.

The game does not force you to do anything.

You shouldn't have to choose the "meta" race to be viable. Less for tanks/healers, but DPS matters. And in many higher level cases you are indirectly forced if you want to compete.

Korah_Eaglecry

Im absolutely okay with racial passives that give certain races an edge over others in certain playstyles. I dont care that a Khajiit Nightblade is going to out Crit my Breton Nightblade. As long as the difference is not so significant that I cant tackle the content as my Breton Nightblade its of no real concern.

My biggest complaint would probably be with the experience gain passives. Theyre absolutely useless once the skill line they benefit is maxed out. Granted no points are placed in these passives. Their still quite underwhelming when you really dont notice the net benefit of the passive in any meaningful manner. So what your Altmer can level Destro 15% faster or Orcs can gain exp from Heavy Armor Crafting 15% faster. What does that really gain you?

xenowarrior92eb17_ESO

jasonthorpeb14_ESO wrote: »

IMO racial passives and racial bonuses can and should exist in games, but should be more focused on aspects which do not directly affect character power or combat effectiveness (like if a race is magical, maybe they perform crafting of enchantments better).
Some minor (+/- 1%) differences between races are ok, but when the difference between optimal and sub-optimal gets into the ranges seen in ESO, it creates a world where players feel shoehorned into playing specific race / class combinations instead of playing whatever they actually would choose absent combat benefits.
The game forces you to choose a specific race for certain roles .

Magicka DD > High Elf , Dunmer
Stamina DD > Redguard , Khajit , Orc , Imperial
Healer > Breton , High Elf , Argonian
Tank > Imperial , Argonian , Orc , Nord

Choosing these races will make a huge difference in terms of performance .

I am talking about 4-5k DPS difference . I am talking about not being able to sustain a build without being an Argonian . Running out of Stamina if you are not Redguard as Stamina DD .

Races are absurdly unbalanced at the moment . Of course there should be a difference between them but not this much .

Counter arguements:

Q: What would be the point of having races then?

A: Races have different stories. characters, lore, aesthetics, etc - there are plenty of reasons to have diverse races.

Q: (dead horse question) What would be the point of having races then?

A: These types of questions confuse me. If I choose to play a Magic Khajiit Templar, my racials are all but useless for that playstyle and for all intent and purpose may as well not exist since their benefits are virtually nonexistent anyways.

Q: Wouldn't that make race choice meaningless and reduce diversity?

There is plenty of choice in race vs attribute/passives.

My magicka characters are dunmer, altmer, Breton, and argonian.

My stam characters are khajiit, Imperial, Nord and Bosmer

They all do just fine, regardless of race.

A: Racial diversity is would NOT decrease if racials were changed or removed. The differences between an Altmer and Argonian are incredibly vast and not just passive wise. An Argonian looks NOTHING like an Altmer, typically lives in swamps and worships sentient trees. Altmer does NONE of that. So racial diversity is not an argument at all.

Also, lol at your examples as they all play within their shoehorned archetype, be it magic or stamina.

(DISCLAIMER, I've taken a lot of this from other threads. I just wanted to organize it in a meaningful way so maybe you turds can understand the logic.)

maybe im crazy but....where are the bosmer in ur list? aka wood elf...or did you just considered they are completely useless went discretely genocide ?

Katahdin

ak_pvp wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

So people disagreed with you and you had to start a whole new thread and insult people in the process.
Repeating it again doesnt make your "logic" (opinion) any less flawed.

Well I disagreed in the other thread and I still disagree now. The passives are just fine.

The point of my examples, which you quoted was that for each attribute (stam or magicka) there are at least 4 races that can do well with either.

If there was such a lack of race diversity in the game because of passivies, as has been argued, we would see nothing but redguards for stam, altmer for magicka, and argonians for healers.

Look around the damn game and youll see that is not the case at all.

I have seen dunmer, argonian, Imperial and even Khajiit play both stamina and magicka characters. Argonians make great healers, but before they were buffed, who would have ever thought to see an argonian stamina tank? Ive seen it and it makes a great tank. Ive seen Khajiits play as a tank (both stam and magicka) and another one as a mag sorc as well. Those characters did just fine. That is hardly being "pigeon holed"

Some might say that the added stamina benefit of certain races may actually help a majicka character in terms of break free and dodge roll under certain circumstances with a slight loss to DPS but hardly the amount you are claiming.

The differences you call "huge" are making a mountain out of a mole hill. The differences are not really even worth worrying about unless you're an ultra min/maxer, in which case you'll probably never be happy anyway.
A better skilled player will still be a better skilled player regardless of the character's passives.

The game does not force you to do anything.

You shouldn't have to choose the "meta" race to be viable. Less for tanks/healers, but DPS matters. And in many higher level cases you are indirectly forced if you want to compete.

Define " higher level", do you mean PvP? Thats pretty high level, arguably the highest competative content in the game, so lets examine that.

If there was only one "meta" race for DPS in each attribute, we would only see that race and only that race in Cyrodill for DPS.
Ive played in Cyrodill quite a bit and I have seen lots more races besides redguards playing stam DPS and altmers playing magicka DPS.

There are plenty of different races playing damage for both stamina and magicka out there.

@Joy_Division , iirc plays a Nord Magicka Templar. That is hardly a "meta" combo, (in fact its arguably one of the worst combos) and she does really well out in Cyrodiil and other high end content.

Katahdin

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

Im absolutely okay with racial passives that give certain races an edge over others in certain playstyles. I dont care that a Khajiit Nightblade is going to out Crit my Breton Nightblade. As long as the difference is not so significant that I cant tackle the content as my Breton Nightblade its of no real concern.

My biggest complaint would probably be with the experience gain passives. Theyre absolutely useless once the skill line they benefit is maxed out. Granted no points are placed in these passives. Their still quite underwhelming when you really dont notice the net benefit of the passive in any meaningful manner. So what your Altmer can level Destro 15% faster or Orcs can gain exp from Heavy Armor Crafting 15% faster. What does that really gain you?

I agree

Qbiken

Katahdin wrote: »

ak_pvp wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

So people disagreed with you and you had to start a whole new thread and insult people in the process.
Repeating it again doesnt make your "logic" (opinion) any less flawed.

Well I disagreed in the other thread and I still disagree now. The passives are just fine.

The point of my examples, which you quoted was that for each attribute (stam or magicka) there are at least 4 races that can do well with either.

If there was such a lack of race diversity in the game because of passivies, as has been argued, we would see nothing but redguards for stam, altmer for magicka, and argonians for healers.

Look around the damn game and youll see that is not the case at all.

I have seen dunmer, argonian, Imperial and even Khajiit play both stamina and magicka characters. Argonians make great healers, but before they were buffed, who would have ever thought to see an argonian stamina tank? Ive seen it and it makes a great tank. Ive seen Khajiits play as a tank (both stam and magicka) and another one as a mag sorc as well. Those characters did just fine. That is hardly being "pigeon holed"

Some might say that the added stamina benefit of certain races may actually help a majicka character in terms of break free and dodge roll under certain circumstances with a slight loss to DPS but hardly the amount you are claiming.

The differences you call "huge" are making a mountain out of a mole hill. The differences are not really even worth worrying about unless you're an ultra min/maxer, in which case you'll probably never be happy anyway.
A better skilled player will still be a better skilled player regardless of the character's passives.

The game does not force you to do anything.

You shouldn't have to choose the "meta" race to be viable. Less for tanks/healers, but DPS matters. And in many higher level cases you are indirectly forced if you want to compete.

Define " higher level", do you mean PvP? Thats pretty high level, arguably the highest competative content in the game, so lets examine that.

If there was only one "meta" race for DPS in each attribute, we would only see that race and only that race in Cyrodill for DPS.

There are plenty of different races playing damage for both stamina and magicka out there.

@Joy_Division , iirc plays a Nord Magicka Templar. That is hardly a "meta" combo, (in fact its arguably one of the worst combos) and she does really well out in Cyrodiil and other high end content.

I would say high end PvE raiding is the closest to competitive end-game you´ll come. In order for something to be competitive you´ll need to be able to measure it. And the only way to "measure" PvP is by AP gain (which can be cheesed in so many ways. Not saying PvE stuff can´t be cheesed but much less likely to be so). There´s a standardisation in PvE that PvP can never come close to (like vAA HM will be the same for any group trying to complete it, while PvP situations will be different for every single individual), therefore PvE is more competitive than PvP.

Back to topic.......

Racials are fine as they´re. And you don´t have to choose a "meta" to be competitive (in both PvE and PvP). Some races are better than other´s on some areas and that is fine (damn even the lore supports it).

Ragnarock41

removing racials won't bring any more variety.

Rİght now I can choose between playing a redguard offensive Dk or an orc tanky Dk.

For PvP I don't see anyone complaining about anything except argonian. cus argonian.. lol.

Silver_Strider

Katahdin wrote: »

Removing passives or making them ala carte will just dumb down the game and cause every stam character to be the same as every other stam character and every magicka character to be the same as every other magicka character because people will just pick whatever the best set of passives are for each.

Isn't that the case now?

The only difference between a Bosmer Magic Sorc and a Altmer Magic Sorc is that the Altmer will out damage the Bosmer six ways to Sunday because of Racial passives but the way they play is exactly the same regardless, if we're discussing optimal playstyle with only race being the differentiating factor. It's not as though you can optimize Bosmer passives for a magic build in any significant way that would give the Bosmer an edge over the Altmer so this point is entirely moot.

As for the rest of your argument, you CAN play whatever way you want and ignore your racials but at that point, it's the same as not having racial passives at all since they help at such a minute level that they can hardly be noticed for the most part. 21% more stamina regen on a magic toon is not going to be significant enough an effect that it would instantly put someone on equal footing with someone that is doing 5k more DPS because of racials, especially when that isn't the chief resource being used and only used on occasion. Also, the food/drink/CP argument is also entirely moot since those same exact tools are available to everyone and thus do not bridge the gap between racials in any way, shape or form.

TheValar85

MY Breton is a DPS Sorcorer i dont want be a Healer with demanded passives. I could use some extra damage buffs and some Magicka Regen pluss and thats all and i will be live happily ever after.
So the Idea is very badly thought out and my reply on your idea is NO thank You!

Joy_Division

Qbiken wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

ak_pvp wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

So people disagreed with you and you had to start a whole new thread and insult people in the process.
Repeating it again doesnt make your "logic" (opinion) any less flawed.

Well I disagreed in the other thread and I still disagree now. The passives are just fine.

The point of my examples, which you quoted was that for each attribute (stam or magicka) there are at least 4 races that can do well with either.

If there was such a lack of race diversity in the game because of passivies, as has been argued, we would see nothing but redguards for stam, altmer for magicka, and argonians for healers.

Look around the damn game and youll see that is not the case at all.

I have seen dunmer, argonian, Imperial and even Khajiit play both stamina and magicka characters. Argonians make great healers, but before they were buffed, who would have ever thought to see an argonian stamina tank? Ive seen it and it makes a great tank. Ive seen Khajiits play as a tank (both stam and magicka) and another one as a mag sorc as well. Those characters did just fine. That is hardly being "pigeon holed"

Some might say that the added stamina benefit of certain races may actually help a majicka character in terms of break free and dodge roll under certain circumstances with a slight loss to DPS but hardly the amount you are claiming.

The differences you call "huge" are making a mountain out of a mole hill. The differences are not really even worth worrying about unless you're an ultra min/maxer, in which case you'll probably never be happy anyway.
A better skilled player will still be a better skilled player regardless of the character's passives.

The game does not force you to do anything.

You shouldn't have to choose the "meta" race to be viable. Less for tanks/healers, but DPS matters. And in many higher level cases you are indirectly forced if you want to compete.

Define " higher level", do you mean PvP? Thats pretty high level, arguably the highest competative content in the game, so lets examine that.

If there was only one "meta" race for DPS in each attribute, we would only see that race and only that race in Cyrodill for DPS.

There are plenty of different races playing damage for both stamina and magicka out there.

@Joy_Division , iirc plays a Nord Magicka Templar. That is hardly a "meta" combo, (in fact its arguably one of the worst combos) and she does really well out in Cyrodiil and other high end content.

I would say high end PvE raiding is the closest to competitive end-game you´ll come. In order for something to be competitive you´ll need to be able to measure it. And the only way to "measure" PvP is by AP gain (which can be cheesed in so many ways. Not saying PvE stuff can´t be cheesed but much less likely to be so). There´s a standardisation in PvE that PvP can never come close to (like vAA HM will be the same for any group trying to complete it, while PvP situations will be different for every single individual), therefore PvE is more competitive than PvP.

Back to topic.......

Racials are fine as they´re. And you don´t have to choose a "meta" to be competitive (in both PvE and PvP). Some races are better than other´s on some areas and that is fine (damn even the lore supports it).

As someone who has done PVE raiding with dedicated raiders, I can most certainly tell you that it is not nearly as "competitive" as PvP, if the measure of success is beating the content. I have done hardmode trials on my "wrong" Nord magplar just fine and well enough to get invited back to groups I have run with. People may disagree here, but what exactly is "competitive"? If it's about successfully completing the content and enabling the group to do so, my Nord successfully met that standard and then some. If it's about a DPS parse against a target dummy, then practicing a rotation is going to get better DPS than spending 3K on a race change token for sure. But for those specific terms than, yes, someone who logs on every day and practices is going to be able to out-parse me if they have the "right" race. Let's be clear though, that's much more ego competition than game competition because the Nord can do the game part just fine.

You don't measure competition in PvP with AP. Not even close. Competition is fighting other players. An objective person can tell if they get beat or not without blaming it on lag, getting zerged, or the many other excuses people conjure to save their egos. In PvE there is larger room for error because once I know the predetermined mechanics of a fight, then I can beat it no matter what race I am because I can follow those mechanics and even the "wrong" race has benefits that help (Nord health bonus, for example). In PvP I can't just overcome another player's increased stats, power, etc., from their race with knowledge of pre-determined mechanics. There racial (dis)advantages become something the only way to overcome is by player skill and experience.

People may disagree with me and that's fine. All I will say is that I can get Flawless Conqueror on my "wrong" race magplar, but if I meet an Argonian magplar in cyrodiil that is equally experienced and skilled as I am, I have little chance of winning. The problem here is not that I chose the wrong race with ill-suited bonuses. Rather it's that my race's passive and benefits stink.

Getting rid of racials to solve this "problem" is about as useful as getting rid of classes, ultiamtes, abilities, etc., and everything else we must choose that makes our characters different from each other. Does the OP really want to play a FPS like game where everyone has the same stats, every spell does the same thing for the same damage, etc., all in the name of fair competition? Sorry, I can say I agree with that. The issue with races is that some of them are poor mechanically (nords especially). It is zos's responsibility to make sure people's choice in this matter does not compromise their overall performance, just as it is zos's responsibility to make sure the classes, abilities, ultimate's, etc., do the same.

Qbiken

Joy_Division wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

ak_pvp wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

So people disagreed with you and you had to start a whole new thread and insult people in the process.
Repeating it again doesnt make your "logic" (opinion) any less flawed.

Well I disagreed in the other thread and I still disagree now. The passives are just fine.

The point of my examples, which you quoted was that for each attribute (stam or magicka) there are at least 4 races that can do well with either.

If there was such a lack of race diversity in the game because of passivies, as has been argued, we would see nothing but redguards for stam, altmer for magicka, and argonians for healers.

Look around the damn game and youll see that is not the case at all.

I have seen dunmer, argonian, Imperial and even Khajiit play both stamina and magicka characters. Argonians make great healers, but before they were buffed, who would have ever thought to see an argonian stamina tank? Ive seen it and it makes a great tank. Ive seen Khajiits play as a tank (both stam and magicka) and another one as a mag sorc as well. Those characters did just fine. That is hardly being "pigeon holed"

Some might say that the added stamina benefit of certain races may actually help a majicka character in terms of break free and dodge roll under certain circumstances with a slight loss to DPS but hardly the amount you are claiming.

The differences you call "huge" are making a mountain out of a mole hill. The differences are not really even worth worrying about unless you're an ultra min/maxer, in which case you'll probably never be happy anyway.
A better skilled player will still be a better skilled player regardless of the character's passives.

The game does not force you to do anything.

You shouldn't have to choose the "meta" race to be viable. Less for tanks/healers, but DPS matters. And in many higher level cases you are indirectly forced if you want to compete.

Define " higher level", do you mean PvP? Thats pretty high level, arguably the highest competative content in the game, so lets examine that.

If there was only one "meta" race for DPS in each attribute, we would only see that race and only that race in Cyrodill for DPS.

There are plenty of different races playing damage for both stamina and magicka out there.

@Joy_Division , iirc plays a Nord Magicka Templar. That is hardly a "meta" combo, (in fact its arguably one of the worst combos) and she does really well out in Cyrodiil and other high end content.

I would say high end PvE raiding is the closest to competitive end-game you´ll come. In order for something to be competitive you´ll need to be able to measure it. And the only way to "measure" PvP is by AP gain (which can be cheesed in so many ways. Not saying PvE stuff can´t be cheesed but much less likely to be so). There´s a standardisation in PvE that PvP can never come close to (like vAA HM will be the same for any group trying to complete it, while PvP situations will be different for every single individual), therefore PvE is more competitive than PvP.

Back to topic.......

Racials are fine as they´re. And you don´t have to choose a "meta" to be competitive (in both PvE and PvP). Some races are better than other´s on some areas and that is fine (damn even the lore supports it).

As someone who has done PVE raiding with dedicated raiders, I can most certainly tell you that it is not nearly as competitive as PvP. I have done hardmode trials on my "wrong" Nord magplar just fine and well enough to get invited back to groups I have run with. People may disagree here, but what exactly is "competitive"? If it's about successfully completing the content and enabling the group to do so, my Nord successfully met that standard and then some. If it's about a DPS parse against a target dummy, then practicing a rotation is going to get you better DPS than spending 3K on a race change token for sure. But for those, specific terms than, yes, someone who logs on every day and practices is going to be able to out-parse me. Let's be clear though, that's much more ego competition than game competition because the Nord can actually do the game part just fine.

You don't measure competition in PvP with AP. Not even close. Competition is fighting other players. An objective person can tell if they get beat or not. In PvE there is much larger room for error because once I know the predetermined mechanics of a fight, then I can beat it no matter what race I am because I can follow those mechanics and even the "wrong" race has benefits that help (Nord health bonus, for example). In PvP I can't just overcome another player's skill with the knowledge of pre-determined mechanics so racial (dis)advantages become something the other way to overcome is by player skill and experience.

People may disagree with me and that's fine. All I will say is that I can get Flawless Conqueror on my "wrong" race magplar, but if I meet an Argonian magplar in cyrodiil that is equally experience and skilled as I am, I have little chance of winning.

Getting rid of racials to solve this "problem" is about as useful as getting rid of classes, ultiamtes, abilities, etc., and everything else we must choose that makes our characters different from each other. Does the OP really want to play a FPS like game where everyone has the same stats, every spell does the same thing for the same damage, etc., all in the name of fair competition? Sorry, I can say I agree with that. The issue with races is that some of them are poor mechanically (nords especially). It is zos's responsibility to make sure people's choice in this matter does not compromise their overall performance, just as it is zos's responsibility to make sure the classes, abilities, ultimate's, etc., do the same.

I would say anything that can be measured and/or compared in a good and standardised way can be considered competitive. In PvE you can compare your group´s score to another group´s score.
I also think that for something to be considered competitive there need to be a goal involved. In PvE that goal can be being #1 on the leaderboards or be the best team on the weekly scoreboard etc....
The only thing I can see being competitive in PvP is winning the campaign you´re playing on.

Joy_Division

Qbiken wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

ak_pvp wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

So people disagreed with you and you had to start a whole new thread and insult people in the process.
Repeating it again doesnt make your "logic" (opinion) any less flawed.

Well I disagreed in the other thread and I still disagree now. The passives are just fine.

The point of my examples, which you quoted was that for each attribute (stam or magicka) there are at least 4 races that can do well with either.

If there was such a lack of race diversity in the game because of passivies, as has been argued, we would see nothing but redguards for stam, altmer for magicka, and argonians for healers.

Look around the damn game and youll see that is not the case at all.

I have seen dunmer, argonian, Imperial and even Khajiit play both stamina and magicka characters. Argonians make great healers, but before they were buffed, who would have ever thought to see an argonian stamina tank? Ive seen it and it makes a great tank. Ive seen Khajiits play as a tank (both stam and magicka) and another one as a mag sorc as well. Those characters did just fine. That is hardly being "pigeon holed"

Some might say that the added stamina benefit of certain races may actually help a majicka character in terms of break free and dodge roll under certain circumstances with a slight loss to DPS but hardly the amount you are claiming.

The differences you call "huge" are making a mountain out of a mole hill. The differences are not really even worth worrying about unless you're an ultra min/maxer, in which case you'll probably never be happy anyway.
A better skilled player will still be a better skilled player regardless of the character's passives.

The game does not force you to do anything.

You shouldn't have to choose the "meta" race to be viable. Less for tanks/healers, but DPS matters. And in many higher level cases you are indirectly forced if you want to compete.

Define " higher level", do you mean PvP? Thats pretty high level, arguably the highest competative content in the game, so lets examine that.

If there was only one "meta" race for DPS in each attribute, we would only see that race and only that race in Cyrodill for DPS.

There are plenty of different races playing damage for both stamina and magicka out there.

@Joy_Division , iirc plays a Nord Magicka Templar. That is hardly a "meta" combo, (in fact its arguably one of the worst combos) and she does really well out in Cyrodiil and other high end content.

I would say high end PvE raiding is the closest to competitive end-game you´ll come. In order for something to be competitive you´ll need to be able to measure it. And the only way to "measure" PvP is by AP gain (which can be cheesed in so many ways. Not saying PvE stuff can´t be cheesed but much less likely to be so). There´s a standardisation in PvE that PvP can never come close to (like vAA HM will be the same for any group trying to complete it, while PvP situations will be different for every single individual), therefore PvE is more competitive than PvP.

Back to topic.......

Racials are fine as they´re. And you don´t have to choose a "meta" to be competitive (in both PvE and PvP). Some races are better than other´s on some areas and that is fine (damn even the lore supports it).

As someone who has done PVE raiding with dedicated raiders, I can most certainly tell you that it is not nearly as competitive as PvP. I have done hardmode trials on my "wrong" Nord magplar just fine and well enough to get invited back to groups I have run with. People may disagree here, but what exactly is "competitive"? If it's about successfully completing the content and enabling the group to do so, my Nord successfully met that standard and then some. If it's about a DPS parse against a target dummy, then practicing a rotation is going to get you better DPS than spending 3K on a race change token for sure. But for those, specific terms than, yes, someone who logs on every day and practices is going to be able to out-parse me. Let's be clear though, that's much more ego competition than game competition because the Nord can actually do the game part just fine.

You don't measure competition in PvP with AP. Not even close. Competition is fighting other players. An objective person can tell if they get beat or not. In PvE there is much larger room for error because once I know the predetermined mechanics of a fight, then I can beat it no matter what race I am because I can follow those mechanics and even the "wrong" race has benefits that help (Nord health bonus, for example). In PvP I can't just overcome another player's skill with the knowledge of pre-determined mechanics so racial (dis)advantages become something the other way to overcome is by player skill and experience.

People may disagree with me and that's fine. All I will say is that I can get Flawless Conqueror on my "wrong" race magplar, but if I meet an Argonian magplar in cyrodiil that is equally experience and skilled as I am, I have little chance of winning.

Getting rid of racials to solve this "problem" is about as useful as getting rid of classes, ultiamtes, abilities, etc., and everything else we must choose that makes our characters different from each other. Does the OP really want to play a FPS like game where everyone has the same stats, every spell does the same thing for the same damage, etc., all in the name of fair competition? Sorry, I can say I agree with that. The issue with races is that some of them are poor mechanically (nords especially). It is zos's responsibility to make sure people's choice in this matter does not compromise their overall performance, just as it is zos's responsibility to make sure the classes, abilities, ultimate's, etc., do the same.

I would say anything that can be measured and/or compared in a good and standardised way can be considered competitive. In PvE you can compare your group´s score to another group´s score.
I also think that for something to be considered competitive there need to be a goal involved. In PvE that goal can be being #1 on the leaderboards or be the best team on the weekly scoreboard etc....
The only thing I can see being competitive in PvP is winning the campaign you´re playing on.

If the only thing you can see being competitive in PvP is winning the campaign, then you have your eyes closed. How does the most basic PvP encounter, a 1v1 fight against another player, does not strike you as competitive, and game competition at that?

Or do you think not playing a game like chess against another person is competitive? Only entering a formal tournament?

zaria

Apache_Kid wrote: »

If you're talking about just straight up removing them but adding nothing then that's just about the worst idea I've ever heard. Now if you're telling me there's another way I can get those stat boosts instead of racial passives then we can talk.

But if you want to nerf all of our characters for the sake of unifomrity then you can miss me with that. You can either pick your favorite race for your little roleplay adventure time or pick the best race for your role/stats. You can't have both and nerf my characters.

Undoing the morrowind sustain nerf or at least most of it would work well as an counter

Aurielle

starkerealm wrote: »

jasonthorpeb14_ESO wrote: »

Choosing these races will make a huge difference in terms of performance .

Second, the races aren't balanced by alliance. I know, you carved them up that way, up there. But, when you've got an alliance that is all Damage Dealers, that's going to create some imbalances. Especially when you can't even roll up a tank for them without shelling out another $20. Now, granted, this is a PvP concern... but it is a serious PvP concern.

I see what you're saying, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that anyone who's serious about PVP and plays in Cyrodiil regularly likely has the Adventurer Pack. It's a small price to pay for the freedom of being able to play in one alliance with a variety of races and roles.

I get why people might want to do away with racials altogether. That being said, given how quick and easy it is to get to level 50 these days, I don't really think it's that big of an issue. People learn quite early on (if they visit the forums or what have you) that race matters slightly depending on the role you want to play. It doesn't take that much effort to start over from scratch for the sake of an extra 3-5k DPS or so. If you feel your character that you've had for ages (with lots of skill points invested, guild lines levelled, etc.) is sub-optimal due to a bad choice made early on, or just because you want to switch things up a bit, then the option for a race change fortunately exists. I do think that the price of the race change feature is way too high, but that's another topic of discussion entirely.