What was the argument againts the Soft Cap system back then?

Violynne

Joshuagm1991 wrote: »

What is hard and soft cap? And I'm being serious.

Hard cap: limit is set and you can't go above it.

Soft cap: no limit, but anything above it requires more resources to achieve the next increase. For example, if it takes 10 "X" per 100 to get to 1000 max, then after the max, it takes 20 "X" per 100, 50 "X" per 100, etc. to get the next increase.

Our CP system uses soft caps. Points added up to 75 has a direct "1 to 1" relationship. After 75, this changes and it takes more points to get an extra percentage.

Wifeaggro13

Kodrac wrote: »

I think removing them just made it easier for the devs. They took the lazy approach.

Bingo

GazettE

Kanar wrote: »

Wasn't heavy armor pointless because you could get all you need from light armor? I played during soft caps, but not a lot. Stamina just sucked then and had no options so I quit playing pretty early, like in May. I remember I could hit volatile armor and be at the point of diminishing returns.

You guys sure the nostalgia isn't just making things seem better than it was?

It would be different. With the present of CP, various morph mag and stamina abilities and the game system itself, i see the return of soft cap would only bring a better diversify and balanced gameplay.

Btw the soft cap that i am referring here is the original soft cap. Not the diminishing soft cap that we are currently have for the CP system.

Wifeaggro13

GazettE wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

Game was alot worse with caps. No thanks

Did you even play the game when there was soft cap?

I see u're member since nov 2015 lol

ahhh and the man is exposed. the game was better with caps. right now the game system will never evolve the cp system is a joke. unfortunately with Tam one and all the increasingly dumbing down proscess briging back caps to dfine builds would likely break the game more. what the game really needs is a new director. right now its dying on the vine, its not evolving or emerging its more of the same, just adding to a very bland game design.

Violynne

Kodrac wrote: »

I think removing them just made it easier for the devs. They took the lazy approach.

I missed this comment originally, but I don't agree with this statement.

It's actually harder to impose a hard cap than a soft one. With a hard cap, you now must ensure all things "equal", which is why we also saw a massive restructuring of skills with the change.

The problem with hard caps is they lock the game from dynamically changing, which is what many people complained about when Veteran ranks were offered.

ZoS would increase the rank, making grinding for new gear a "necessity" for those who want to max out their characters.

With a hard cap, we'll be stuck at CP160 for a while until the player base complains the game has become too stale.

Once any hard cap is achieved, there are no more carrots for players to chase.

Gamers have always been vocal about both change and static. It's as though they can't make up their mind of which is better.

As for my personal opinion, I find a dynamic game is always a better one, even if it means changing. That's the entire point of experience building: change over time.

But lest you allow those who spent hundreds of hours chasing the best gear in the game finding it obsolete with the next dynamic roll out, the hate posts spam the forum seconds after the announcement.

Gamers are the one who needs to change, frankly. They can't have it both ways.

technohic

Kanar wrote: »

Wasn't heavy armor pointless because you could get all you need from light armor? I played during soft caps, but not a lot. Stamina just sucked then and had no options so I quit playing pretty early, like in May. I remember I could hit volatile armor and be at the point of diminishing returns.

You guys sure the nostalgia isn't just making things seem better than it was?

Im not sure that it matters because I think the armor cap is still there. Could be wrong though. Either way; everyone wants to bring up flaws from that time but they are not mutually inclusive. Things could have been balanced with the caps in place.

ol_BANK_lo

Kodrac wrote: »

I think removing them just made it easier for the devs. They took the lazy approach.

Always the person who knows nothing about the other side of the argument that uses "lazy" as their go-to tagline. "I don't understand, therefore 'they' must be lazy". Kudos on a defenseless argument.

Kodrac

BANK_IT_HERE wrote: »

Kodrac wrote: »

I think removing them just made it easier for the devs. They took the lazy approach.

Always the person who knows nothing about the other side of the argument that uses "lazy" as their go-to tagline. "I don't understand, therefore 'they' must be lazy". Kudos on a defenseless argument.

Are you describing yourself there? You offered nothing to the discussion. It made it easier for them to balance one stat pool vs three. Managing one thing is easier than multiple. So yes. Lazy. Get over yourself.

ofSunhold

Same as they are now, some version of "I should be rewarded for my build choice of every point into stamina," and "what's the point of even living if I don't become more and more powerful forever?" - and the argument for and against all things, "build diversity."

Soft limitations and either-or choices would be good for the game I think, but it may be a little late. So much content has been added based around everybody being a powerhouse and every character's focus largely determined by whatever they're wearing at the moment, a significant overhaul would be needed. They didn't do that very well when they changed all the scaling at 1T, I'm not very confident they'd be thorough about it.