ESO Class Reps

DuskMarine

long as the class reps dont mess the game up for everyone making everything impossible or just stupid i really dont care i just want the game to be better.

anitajoneb17_ESO

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Lake wrote: »

One of the class reps mentioned that Lead Combat Designer Wrobel won't be at the meeting. Is that true?

Fake news. He's sitting right next to me.

Lucky him, to be shielded by you

ZOS_JesC

Greetings, we removed a few comments for baiting. Please consider our forum rules before commenting. Thank you for your understanding.

BohnT

When will the summary of the first Class Rep Meeting be released?

SirAxen

I see a lot jealousy disguised as 'concerns'. Let the current reps do their thing. If something suggested is overtly dumb, then the community can point it out. Until then, ease up on the paranoia and chill out.

Maura_Neysa

Have to say, from the Discord released plans, that I'm pretty happy with what the what the Reps are gathering. What they plan on bringing to the meeting. The real question is, what does ZoS with it all is the real question.

Checkmath

BohnT wrote: »

When will the summary of the first Class Rep Meeting be released?

we plan to release the summary today, so stay tuned

FeaR Turbo

I AM SO HYPEDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD.

Masel

FeaR Turbo wrote: »

I AM SO HYPEDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD.

Blobsky

Inb4 Incap buff

SorataArisugawa

Blobsky wrote: »

Inb4 Incap buff

THIS will be fun...

Checkmath

actually a nerf to incap was suggested....

Masel

Blobsky wrote: »

Inb4 Incap buff

If that's what you took from what we summarised and in consequence told the devs, then you are clearly mistaken

Blobsky

Masel92 wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Inb4 Incap buff

If that's what you took from what we summarised and in consequence told the devs, then you are clearly mistaken

Where is the summary? I haven't 'taken' anything, I haven't seen the summary yet and am just memeing, something that is apparently OK

Masel

Blobsky wrote: »

Masel92 wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Inb4 Incap buff

If that's what you took from what we summarised and in consequence told the devs, then you are clearly mistaken

Where is the summary? I haven't 'taken' anything, I haven't seen the summary yet and am just memeing, something that is apparently OK

If you'd have taken a look into the discord channels, i posted summary statistics in all of them where i list the major points for all classes under the "feedback form" threads

Blobsky

Masel92 wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Masel92 wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Inb4 Incap buff

If that's what you took from what we summarised and in consequence told the devs, then you are clearly mistaken

Where is the summary? I haven't 'taken' anything, I haven't seen the summary yet and am just memeing, something that is apparently OK

If you'd have taken a look into the discord channels, i posted summary statistics in all of them where i list the major points for all classes under the "feedback form" threads

Not everybody is on the Discord channels for various reasons. Can the representatives post a copy-paste of each on the forum for the vast majority of people not interested in that discord?

anitajoneb17_ESO

Masel92 wrote: »

If you'd have taken a look into the discord channels, i posted summary statistics in all of them where i list the major points for all classes under the "feedback form" threads

I did take a look at the Discord channels. With the best will on Earth, there's nothing to find there, it's just a mess for the outsider's eye.
Please all call reps, stop considering the discords as a normal extension of these forums. It may be handy for you but it definitely isn't for most of us.

Masel

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Masel92 wrote: »

If you'd have taken a look into the discord channels, i posted summary statistics in all of them where i list the major points for all classes under the "feedback form" threads

I did take a look at the Discord channels. With the best will on Earth, there's nothing to find there, it's just a mess for the outsider's eye.
Please all call reps, stop considering the discords as a normal extension of these forums. It may be handy for you but it definitely isn't for most of us.

I was never a fan of the discords because of exactly that, which is why i introduced the standardised feedback form where you can categorise your feedback so it is a lot easier to compile and oversee.

Integral1900

A forum version would be appreciated, discord is like looking for a glass needle in a glass haystack

Blobsky

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Masel92 wrote: »

If you'd have taken a look into the discord channels, i posted summary statistics in all of them where i list the major points for all classes under the "feedback form" threads

I did take a look at the Discord channels. With the best will on Earth, there's nothing to find there, it's just a mess for the outsider's eye.
Please all call reps, stop considering the discords as a normal extension of these forums. It may be handy for you but it definitely isn't for most of us.

Masel92 wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Masel92 wrote: »

If you'd have taken a look into the discord channels, i posted summary statistics in all of them where i list the major points for all classes under the "feedback form" threads

I did take a look at the Discord channels. With the best will on Earth, there's nothing to find there, it's just a mess for the outsider's eye.
Please all call reps, stop considering the discords as a normal extension of these forums. It may be handy for you but it definitely isn't for most of us.

I was never a fan of the discords because of exactly that, which is why i introduced the standardised feedback form where you can categorise your feedback so it is a lot easier to compile and oversee.

Exactly what anja said, the discord was a disaster, for those interested in looking at structure can you post a summary here?

anitajoneb17_ESO

Masel92 wrote: »

I was never a fan of the discords because of exactly that, which is why i introduced the standardised feedback form where you can categorise your feedback so it is a lot easier to compile and oversee.

So why did you create the discords in the first place ? You just decided to add yet another thing ?
Is it so hard to understand that multiplying the channels will add to confusion instead of sorting stuff out ?
Do you realize that feedback channels (and their clarity) are more important to the feedback provider than to the feedback receiver ?

Guys, you want us to trust you, but when you show such lackings in basic methodology...

Anyway, sorry for the rant, let's see what happens next.

Checkmath

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Masel92 wrote: »

I was never a fan of the discords because of exactly that, which is why i introduced the standardised feedback form where you can categorise your feedback so it is a lot easier to compile and oversee.

So why did you create the discords in the first place ? You just decided to add yet another thing ?
Is it so hard to understand that multiplying the channels will add to confusion instead of sorting stuff out ?
Do you realize that feedback channels (and their clarity) are more important to the feedback provider than to the feedback receiver ?

Guys, you want us to trust you, but when you show such lackings in basic methodology...

Anyway, sorry for the rant, let's see what happens next.

so basically you just rant now, because discord is not your thing? thats fine for us, then you can just hand in your feedback in the forums. there are plenty of people liking the discords and the structure in there and therefore i call that a success. enough people participated in the discords and many keep participating, because they could discuss about really specific stuff without getting intercepted in the topic. exactly for that reason we created channels for some skills and playstyles, even for passives, so if we wanted the feedback to one specific topic, we had a really sorted channel with comment concerning that one. it is only up to you how you want to participate, but i highly suggest you stop complaining about how we get the feedback, since we offered a way for everyone with discords, forums and the feedback form. no idea why this should be a trusting problem, just because a few dont like the idea. most feedback is from the discords and therefore we can assume that there are only a few people with a problem with that kind of form.

Checkmath

btw the summary of the meeting will be posted by Gina later this day, so stay patient, since that woman already has enough stuff to do without you guys in here asking for the summary all the time.

Lake

Blobsky wrote: »

Exactly what anja said, the discord was a disaster, for those interested in looking at structure can you post a summary here?

Here are the class-related summary pie charts Masel posted in the separate Discords, with the accompanying text:

Nightblades still ahve a lot of skills that they feel are not worth using (debilitate, power extraction, malevolent offering), they feel that the class is too dependent on cloak, so they want another defensive ability that lets them use different strategies
Then, especially incapacitatign strike was mentioned to be too strong by over 10% of posts
Most fo the CC related posts also refer to incap as the major source of issues
The focus on light attacks makes them hard to play for many people with either high ping or handicaps

(I didn't see a text summary for this.)

Templars have similar issues with mobility as dragonknights do, in both PvP and PvE, their "stand your ground" and "house" concepts do nit suit the fast paced gameplay. templars have little to no mobility nbecasue they have stationary buffs that bind them to a certain spot (16%)
also, they feel that their passives are weak and situational compared to others (26%)
Over 34% of replies said they want a better CC-kit than tehy currently have, after the removal of blazing spear stun
Additionally, their sustain (especially on stamina templars) was amin focus of feedback (25%)
repentance is counterintuitive: you compete with allies over corpses, because only one can restore resources for him/herself
stamplars have no way to passively restore stamina, similar to stamsorcs, making light attack rotations a lot more difficult to maintain on these

Warden issues were mostly concerning the bear pet, their passives, the lack of possibilities for ice mage builds & the lack of a class-based hard CC in PvP. that deep fissure change was very negatively received by many players
And they miss abilities taht actually do damage in comparison to others, many abilities only provide buffs that you get from other sources (looking at you falcon)

Sorcerers' biggest concern are pets (who wouldve seen that coming), over 46% of replies were criticising pet behaviour in trials, pvp and in general how pets interact. Then, many players deem the crytsal fragment CC change unjustified and want the hard CC back. Stamina Sorcerers in PvE and PvP feel liek they dont contribute to group play and miss interesting passives
Also, sorcerers are omne of the mobile classes, but have no reliable way to get rid of snares and prevent being CCed
Another big piece of feedback (22%) pointed out that sorcerer sustain is worse than on other classes, which is justifiably correct (based on combat metrics data of drain/regen)
they miss a passive way to restore stamina/magicka, and have no room to slot an active skill without giving up crucial skills

Rickter

All key points and feedback pie charts are posted to clutter free channels and pinned for quick reference. If you look at yhe general channel and conclude that its a disaster, thats fake news and misrepresentative of the back end organization and how the feedback is gathered by the class reps.

Anyways - how about you applaud the class reps for their responsible decision to suggest a nerf of incap?

I mean we were all scared theyd just buff their classes right?

Lol. Humanity.

CrazYDunm3r

Some discords were a disaster, but not all. I think the representatives did a good job for their first time, keep that in mind too. Just have some patience for the summary.

Blobsky

Lake wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Exactly what anja said, the discord was a disaster, for those interested in looking at structure can you post a summary here?

Here are the class-related summary pie charts Masel posted in the separate Discords:

So...
67.12% Nightblade total?
96.05% DK
114.47% Templar
97.38% Warden
122.37% Sorc

What is the remaining percentage? The ones above 100% are mathematically sound assuming an overlap of two options or more. Being under 100%, however, is mathematically impossible unless the data is wrong.

Also I'd like to point out that this doesn't show whether issues are a 'needs a buff' or 'needs a nerf' which are hugely important factors. On top of this, it doesn't differentiate between magicka and stamina.

Do you have a written summary of the MAIN issues specifically for each class? e.g. Cloak is heavily overperforming and allows a fight reset far too easily OR Cloak is buggy and unreliable to use.


PS: If you seriously buff petsorcs (as much of the sorc discussion was about) you need to understand how broken this is. This is coming from somebody who mains a petsorc as his Sorc playstyle and has a deep understanding of how to use it.


As somebody pretty good with numbers, and with friends who study University level maths and above, I'd like to know how this data was actually got to understand how this chart was built, because the founding of the numbers is equally important as the chart. Else it is like having a graph of 'use of oil in countries' without any units.

Checkmath

Blobsky wrote: »

Lake wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Exactly what anja said, the discord was a disaster, for those interested in looking at structure can you post a summary here?

Here are the class-related summary pie charts Masel posted in the separate Discords:

So...
67.12% Nightblade total?
96.05% DK
114.47% Templar
97.38% Warden
122.37% Sorc

What is the remaining percentage? The ones above 100% are mathematically sound assuming an overlap of two options or more. Being under 100%, however, is mathematically impossible unless the data is wrong.

Also I'd like to point out that this doesn't show whether issues are a 'needs a buff' or 'needs a nerf' which are hugely important factors. On top of this, it doesn't differentiate between magicka and stamina.

Do you have a written summary of the MAIN issues specifically for each class? e.g. Cloak is heavily overperforming and allows a fight reset far too easily OR Cloak is buggy and unreliable to use.


PS: If you seriously buff petsorcs (as much of the sorc discussion was about) you need to understand how broken this is. This is coming from somebody who mains a petsorc as his Sorc playstyle and has a deep understanding of how to use it.

the charts are from the feedback form, where it was possible to not mark a topic to a comment, so basic feedback about a class without mentioning a topic results in less than 100% cake, meanwhile a feedback can include several topics and therefore counts for both, which is the reason to get more than 100%.
the charts dont show about what the feedback was specifically. the charts were only for the discords to show to the people, where to pain points are lying, not for showing what exactly the problem is. about the summary, i said 10 mins ago that Gina will post it later this day. the feedback we handed in to the devs was very precise including problems of stamina toons, magicka toons, the roles of tanks, healers and damage dealers. in most of the discords a summary of discussed things are already present. about sorc and pets, we never said we wanted to buff them, we want to change them.

Blobsky

Checkmath wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Lake wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Exactly what anja said, the discord was a disaster, for those interested in looking at structure can you post a summary here?

Here are the class-related summary pie charts Masel posted in the separate Discords:

So...
67.12% Nightblade total?
96.05% DK
114.47% Templar
97.38% Warden
122.37% Sorc

What is the remaining percentage? The ones above 100% are mathematically sound assuming an overlap of two options or more. Being under 100%, however, is mathematically impossible unless the data is wrong.

Also I'd like to point out that this doesn't show whether issues are a 'needs a buff' or 'needs a nerf' which are hugely important factors. On top of this, it doesn't differentiate between magicka and stamina.

Do you have a written summary of the MAIN issues specifically for each class? e.g. Cloak is heavily overperforming and allows a fight reset far too easily OR Cloak is buggy and unreliable to use.


PS: If you seriously buff petsorcs (as much of the sorc discussion was about) you need to understand how broken this is. This is coming from somebody who mains a petsorc as his Sorc playstyle and has a deep understanding of how to use it.

the charts are from the feedback form, where it was possible to not mark a topic to a comment, so basic feedback about a class without mentioning a topic results in less than 100% cake, meanwhile a feedback can include several topics and therefore counts for both, which is the reason to get more than 100%.
the charts dont show about what the feedback was specifically. the charts were only for the discords to show to the people, where to pain points are lying, not for showing what exactly the problem is. about the summary, i said 10 mins ago that Gina will post it later this day. the feedback we handed in to the devs was very precise including problems of stamina toons, magicka toons, the roles of tanks, healers and damage dealers. in most of the discords a summary of discussed things are already present. about sorc and pets, we never said we wanted to buff them, we want to change them.

Appreciate it, thank you. any idea when Gina will post the suggestions? @ZOS_GinaBruno

CrazYDunm3r

Checkmath wrote: »

BohnT wrote: »

When will the summary of the first Class Rep Meeting be released?

we plan to release the summary today, so stay tuned

@Blobsky