Upcoming Racial Balance Changes for Update 21

Dracane

@Masel I have made a more careful test now and I am beginning to believe, you try to deceive people.

My magicka with Gift of Magnus is 48,898
Orginally I just slotted a mages ability (2%) magicka and took it by 5 which is 10%. I thought, maybe it does scale differently. But no, I was right. I removed gift of magnus and ended up with 44,655 Magicka, that is a 4213 difference !

Then I wanted to see how much magicka 2000 will end up being. I thought bright throats was perfect for this, as it gives 2000 magicka. But it turned out that Bright throats is bugged and its 2000 magicka do not scale, they remain roughly 2000 magicka (fix it maybe? )

So I had to take 2 monster sets, which is a bit unprecise. But the number was roughly 2500. Hence I loose 1700 magicka and mind you, that is my pvp setup. The loss will be higher in pve where I have more magicka. Everyone has such magicka numbers in pve and everyone will loose the same amount as I do and everyone who actually tests this, will see this as well. A calculator theory will not reveal the truth. (eso's math is too messy to even be predicted)

Now a final test, to show you that Altmer will be nerfed by this.
Let us take force pulse as an example. My force pulse without 4% elemental damage, deals 2993 per element. (No glyph damage) With 4% added, it's 3081 (As I said, actually TESTED, not calculated)
Then I equipped 2 spell damage monster sets which give me exactly 258 base damage. Added to this is major sorcery and those few percent that the Sorcerer passive gives me (6% for me here) Force pulse now deals 3096 per element.

That is 45 damage more compared to elemental talent. Good on the first glance, right ? But now we consider loosing 1700 magicka or more (Every normal build will loose that, as my magicka numbers are totally normal) We can see that elemental damage will definately be worse now. Sure, pure magic damage profits from that, aka Nightblades and Templars. But Sorcerer and Dk and I dare say Wardens, do not. Most of their damage is elemental and will be weaker.

My conclusion is, that current ressource values for races are too low, especially for magicka builds. Ressource values would be raised by at least 500 to not pose a nerf for our current setups.

Moonsorrow

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

Dracane

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

Pevey

I can understand changing the percentage stat bonuses to flat amounts, but I can’t understand why the flat amounts are so low. Dunmer and bosmer got especially screwed with these racial passive changes, but I think with all of the discussion about which race will be better or worse now, no one is pointing out that resource pools across the board get nerfed with these changes. I am so sick of nerfs.

Masel

Dracane wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere. In total, the stats the races have will be a slight buff to what they had before. 258 Spell Damage translates into more damage then the old damage done passive. I chose the word stat density specifically because i am not solely focused on resources (magicka and stamina), simply saying races get nerfed because our resource pools might be a bit lower is overlooking all other passives. Even the strongest races on damage dealers did not lose anything, and the weaker ones got stronger. Focusing on that one stat is ignoring the rest entirely. I made a table how much maximum resource you lose on a generic siroria+zaan+sorrow build right here:



This is basically just simulating the build values by taking out passives from the uesp build editor and adding the 2k magicka manually into the magicka formula.
This seems like the outcome will be negative, because builds will have slightly lower resources, right?

But when you consider the spell damage or sustain benefits that many stamina and magicka builds have, this gets turned around. Damage done (as we had previously on dunmer and altmer) sounds like a nice passive because it sounds like it buffs damage by that % value, but in CP content that translates to around half of what it actually says. You have between 40-50% damage done on most CP builds, so added 7% or 4% on elemental damage only will only be ~4.5 and ~2.5% respectively. The spell damage, cost reduction, recovery or whatever the new passives are are a lot more useful, because they do not shoehorn races nto a specific class. Say whatever you want about the balancing between races, but these changes are not a nerf to any of the races that qualify for the damage dealer position and bring them more on par. The only choice that lost a little bit of damage potentially is a dunmer magicka DK, since they can take full advantage of the 7% flame damage. The 258 SD they got for it boosts healing by a lot more than the damage you lose and gets amplified, so even IF there is a slight loss in damage for that specific combination, the added tooltips of all abilities make up for that.

There are still concerns that i see in them of course: Dunmer loses out to altmer in the magicka DD setting because of the lower recovery without an additional benefit that is relevant for a DD build. Health isnt doing a lot since you basically dont need it. So Dunmer could use a little bit of unique sustain for magicka builds (or the higher stat for that matter).

Then, Imperial and Argonian do not qualify for damage dealers really, since their passives are not really helpful. Imperial is basically forced to tank, since the block and bash cost reduction is too niceh to be noticable on anything else. Stamina DD are generally fine, we ahve to test the effectiveness of bosmer against redguard on PTS and see how they perform to evaluate that further. Khajiit is better than many people make it seem, but i agree that the recovery seems a bit low.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

To the point of DoTs being direct damage above by @John_Falstaff, generally DoTs are DoTs. They can have a direct damage portion whcih will proc it, but if there are DoTs that count as direct still, we need to change that quickly so it cannot be abused in this context. Also consider that damage enchants assume the damage type of the ability they proc off. So a damage enchant proccing of Endless hail will be DoT-Damage, and therefore not be able to proc adrenaline rush. Ideally you'd ahve to really be able to keep doing direct damage on the enemy to proc this.

This is not the case for every race. For Altmer it will be a nerf for their main spells. Most spells used are elemental and we already have 4% elemental damage. 258 spell damage (with all spell damage % applied) is only slightly more than 4% damage. So this could be slight buff, if it wasn't for the huge amount of magicka we will loose. In the end, only magic damage spells will be better (very few pure magic is used) but elemental damage will be worse.

I really think all races should have their ressources values buffed. 2000 is too much of a loss to justify.
Pve Sorcerer don't have a single magic damage spell. Everything is either shock or fire. Only elemental weapons is magical and that alone won't be able to uphold the nerf and not everyone uses that anyway.

huge amount of magicka you lose? Look on the table above... 258 Spell Damage buffs healing too, and you lose 500 magicka, which is equal to 50 spell damage. So it is 200 spell damage vs. 4% damage done on 2/3 of your damage. There's no reason to be upset about this at all.

No, I loose over 1700 magicka. For your build, that might be the case. But not everyone uses your build and not everyone is a nightblade with mostly magic damage. It will be a nerf for many builds that do no follow your streamline.

Okay i am intrigued how you tested that. Explain to me how you lost 1700 magicka...

What am I supposed to explain ? The fact that gift of Magnus gives me 4237 magicka ?

In order to get to a loss of 1.7k you have to have over 70k magicka. i tried stacking as much as i could into max magicka and i couldnt get there. I'm sorry, but i trust the UESP guys and Combat Devs more than your own test.

Even IF you lose that 1700 magicka, you still get a return in exchange. On a sorcerer, 258 spell damage get boosted a lot (by major+minor sorcery+2% for every class skill on your bar) and even on a pet sorc it will most likely net you the same damage as before, simply because 258 spell damage outperform 4% damage done in CP content.

Then I have no clue how you came up with this. With 48k magicka, nothing fancy, 10% GoM gives me 4200 magicka. In pve it will be even more. I really don't know how you calculate those numbers. I can only say, it should be done rather than calculated.

It gives you 4200 magicka, i didnt debate that. Its just that the difference will not be 1700 magicka, especially in PvE, where you have more amplifiers than in solo/pvp content...

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

I try to lie to you? Good grief.

Moonsorrow

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

It is because some of their numbers come close to the current ones, especially in CP environment on an average build that is focused on spell/weapon damage. So for PVE they are close with the values if thinking around the meta builds there. But functional pvp builds can be extremes often that benefit more from % than from (too) small flat values.

But sadly, NO-CP pvp is clearly forgotten in their mathematical approach to these values. They are putting CP buffs in, CP % values to maximum in their calculations and then showing us the results.

Battlegrounds is no-cp and i tend to think Battlegrounds as the pride and joy, the good child, the working mode of pvp in this game, that ZOS can show at meetings and happenings to everyone, since Cyrodiil can be a laggy mess often with zergs pvdooring keeps and running after 1 player.. so would think they want to keep thinking about No-CP values also and us who have fun yet very functional builds with high extreme numbers on something.

Some of the flat numbers are buff, but to pve builds with close to the base values on things that pve builds do not even build to benefit from normally, so they are not lying about them, but as i keep saying, pvp builds can be very different from those type of builds. So we have an issue on that. So the goal of "freedom" on these changes could have been handled way better in many of the changes, sadly.

Dracane

Masel wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere. In total, the stats the races have will be a slight buff to what they had before. 258 Spell Damage translates into more damage then the old damage done passive. I chose the word stat density specifically because i am not solely focused on resources (magicka and stamina), simply saying races get nerfed because our resource pools might be a bit lower is overlooking all other passives. Even the strongest races on damage dealers did not lose anything, and the weaker ones got stronger. Focusing on that one stat is ignoring the rest entirely. I made a table how much maximum resource you lose on a generic siroria+zaan+sorrow build right here:



This is basically just simulating the build values by taking out passives from the uesp build editor and adding the 2k magicka manually into the magicka formula.
This seems like the outcome will be negative, because builds will have slightly lower resources, right?

But when you consider the spell damage or sustain benefits that many stamina and magicka builds have, this gets turned around. Damage done (as we had previously on dunmer and altmer) sounds like a nice passive because it sounds like it buffs damage by that % value, but in CP content that translates to around half of what it actually says. You have between 40-50% damage done on most CP builds, so added 7% or 4% on elemental damage only will only be ~4.5 and ~2.5% respectively. The spell damage, cost reduction, recovery or whatever the new passives are are a lot more useful, because they do not shoehorn races nto a specific class. Say whatever you want about the balancing between races, but these changes are not a nerf to any of the races that qualify for the damage dealer position and bring them more on par. The only choice that lost a little bit of damage potentially is a dunmer magicka DK, since they can take full advantage of the 7% flame damage. The 258 SD they got for it boosts healing by a lot more than the damage you lose and gets amplified, so even IF there is a slight loss in damage for that specific combination, the added tooltips of all abilities make up for that.

There are still concerns that i see in them of course: Dunmer loses out to altmer in the magicka DD setting because of the lower recovery without an additional benefit that is relevant for a DD build. Health isnt doing a lot since you basically dont need it. So Dunmer could use a little bit of unique sustain for magicka builds (or the higher stat for that matter).

Then, Imperial and Argonian do not qualify for damage dealers really, since their passives are not really helpful. Imperial is basically forced to tank, since the block and bash cost reduction is too niceh to be noticable on anything else. Stamina DD are generally fine, we ahve to test the effectiveness of bosmer against redguard on PTS and see how they perform to evaluate that further. Khajiit is better than many people make it seem, but i agree that the recovery seems a bit low.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

To the point of DoTs being direct damage above by @John_Falstaff, generally DoTs are DoTs. They can have a direct damage portion whcih will proc it, but if there are DoTs that count as direct still, we need to change that quickly so it cannot be abused in this context. Also consider that damage enchants assume the damage type of the ability they proc off. So a damage enchant proccing of Endless hail will be DoT-Damage, and therefore not be able to proc adrenaline rush. Ideally you'd ahve to really be able to keep doing direct damage on the enemy to proc this.

This is not the case for every race. For Altmer it will be a nerf for their main spells. Most spells used are elemental and we already have 4% elemental damage. 258 spell damage (with all spell damage % applied) is only slightly more than 4% damage. So this could be slight buff, if it wasn't for the huge amount of magicka we will loose. In the end, only magic damage spells will be better (very few pure magic is used) but elemental damage will be worse.

I really think all races should have their ressources values buffed. 2000 is too much of a loss to justify.
Pve Sorcerer don't have a single magic damage spell. Everything is either shock or fire. Only elemental weapons is magical and that alone won't be able to uphold the nerf and not everyone uses that anyway.

huge amount of magicka you lose? Look on the table above... 258 Spell Damage buffs healing too, and you lose 500 magicka, which is equal to 50 spell damage. So it is 200 spell damage vs. 4% damage done on 2/3 of your damage. There's no reason to be upset about this at all.

No, I loose over 1700 magicka. For your build, that might be the case. But not everyone uses your build and not everyone is a nightblade with mostly magic damage. It will be a nerf for many builds that do no follow your streamline.

Okay i am intrigued how you tested that. Explain to me how you lost 1700 magicka...

What am I supposed to explain ? The fact that gift of Magnus gives me 4237 magicka ?

In order to get to a loss of 1.7k you have to have over 70k magicka. i tried stacking as much as i could into max magicka and i couldnt get there. I'm sorry, but i trust the UESP guys and Combat Devs more than your own test.

Even IF you lose that 1700 magicka, you still get a return in exchange. On a sorcerer, 258 spell damage get boosted a lot (by major+minor sorcery+2% for every class skill on your bar) and even on a pet sorc it will most likely net you the same damage as before, simply because 258 spell damage outperform 4% damage done in CP content.

Then I have no clue how you came up with this. With 48k magicka, nothing fancy, 10% GoM gives me 4200 magicka. In pve it will be even more. I really don't know how you calculate those numbers. I can only say, it should be done rather than calculated.

It gives you 4200 magicka, i didnt debate that. Its just that the difference will not be 1700 magicka, especially in PvE, where you have more amplifiers than in solo/pvp content...

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

I try to lie to you? Good grief.

Please don't ride around on the negative. Why do you ignore the facts I have presented to you ?

Dracane

Moonsorrow wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

It is because some of their numbers come close to the current ones, especially in CP environment on an average build that is focused on spell/weapon damage. So for PVE they are close with the values if thinking around the meta builds there. But functional pvp builds can be extremes often that benefit more from % than from (too) small flat values.

But sadly, NO-CP pvp is (and can, luckily more freedom at pvp side of things) clearly forgotten in their mathematical approach to these values. They are putting CP buffs in, CP % values to maximum in their calculations and then showing us the results.

Battlegrounds is no-cp and i tend to think Battlegrounds as the pride and joy, the good child, the working mode of pvp in this game, that ZOS can show at meetings and happenings to everyone, since Cyrodiil can be a laggy mess often with zergs pvdooring keeps and running after 1 player.. so would think they want to keep thinking about No-CP values also and us who have fun yet very functional builds with high extreme numbers on something.

Well. I could talk about how I loose over 2k Magicka in content where my max magicka is higher. But is 44k really considered stacking ? That is a rather normal number to me and even here, the changes will not be a delight.

It seems to me they only think about the most optimal case: Nightblade with free 8% magicka from passives, raid warhorn etc. etc. Those numbers only take into account the top of the top and one single build, while ignoring that everyone else will be nerfed by this.

Why are we so afraid of buffing people or giving them something good ? Why must everything get worse, more streamlined and less interesting every patch ?

AcadianPaladin

ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »

...

The Problem Space

Below are the higher level reasons on why we decided to move toward reworking many of the racial changes for U21, and explanations of them to help understand their impact.

1. Right now there are a lack of effective options in picking your race/class combination.
   • This is mainly due to the fact that many of the racial bonuses are percent increases of stats, rather than flat ones. This means races that provided a bonus to a stat that you didn’t focus into gave very little tangible impact.
2. Many racial bonuses do not have universal applicability.
   • Many bonuses provided from races had narrow application or requirements, such as specific damage types or proc conditions. For example, Orc’s have a damage bonus that only applied to melee attacks, instead of all physical attacks.
3. Not every race provides a completely unique gameplay element.
   • Some races currently provide smaller unique bonuses such as immunity to specific status effects, or sneaking; but not every race has something of this manner. On top of this, some of the larger, more defining passives were not comparable in terms of impact. For instance, compare the Argonian Resourceful passive to Imperial’s Red Diamond.
4. Some races provided far more mathematical combat power than others.
   • The delta between some races is noticeably high, leaving some races feeling left behind while others feel too good to pass up from a combat perspective.

To summarize, we decided to focus more on racial balance this update because racial choice was one of the larger outliers to our core mantra of the game - freedom. We wanted to expand the horizon for choice and present players with a self-reflecting question of “What is my playstyle or ideal build?”, providing options to help reach that individual answer. Now, instead of having a single race that focuses almost exclusively on a specific playstyle, you can pick based on a personal level. ...

I agree with the problems listed above. My concern is the proposed changes do little to address the identified problems.

My biggest concern with the proposed race changes is that they do nothing to address the fact that race selection encourages you to play either a stamina or magicka character. We do not accept such 'channeling' into certain roles based on gender in the Elder Scrolls world; why do we accept it for race?

My Bosmeri mage's racials suggest that she should only play stamina. That fact speaks to every problem listed above. The proposed racial modifications do nothing to change this.

Recette

Masel wrote:

It gives you 4200 magicka, i didnt debate that. Its just that the difference will not be 1700 magicka, especially in PvE, where you have more amplifiers than in solo/pvp content...

Yet that was exactly the point. Tested under the most realistic environment currently possible in the game, having a flat + 2 k to Magicka instead of the percentage based bonus from Gift of Magnus comes roughly 1,7 k short in comparison.

You argue from a PvE group content perspective with optimized setups running meta builds. The 1,7 k is assuming a situation outside of that very narrow gameplay window, especially from a solo or small scale group players perspective. I would wager a lot of people would lose out on stats here, while a handful of people running optimized PvE setups will break even or be slightly ahead.

Also, as was already mentioned beforeand completely ignored, the change is built around balanced metagame setups. Specialized setups which are quite common in high end PvP lose out big time as far as their resource pools go, with no tangible gains to compensate for that, further narrowing down the amount of creative builds that can be viable and forcing even more people into a set meta.

You also argue that this data is based on speculation when it really isn't. But worry not, come the PTS, we will provide you with side by side comparisons of screesnhots showcasing the impact of these changes, thereby providing hard evidence for these claims.


Now to be fair, there is one scenario where people with flat bonuses will come out quite ahead, and that is when they are running completely non meta builds like Stamina Altmer or Magicka Bosmer, where little to no stacking of the races primary racial stat occurs. While this is great for build diversity, it hardly affects the majority of players outside a very specific non optimizing niche.

Moonsorrow

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

It is because some of their numbers come close to the current ones, especially in CP environment on an average build that is focused on spell/weapon damage. So for PVE they are close with the values if thinking around the meta builds there. But functional pvp builds can be extremes often that benefit more from % than from (too) small flat values.

But sadly, NO-CP pvp is (and can, luckily more freedom at pvp side of things) clearly forgotten in their mathematical approach to these values. They are putting CP buffs in, CP % values to maximum in their calculations and then showing us the results.

Battlegrounds is no-cp and i tend to think Battlegrounds as the pride and joy, the good child, the working mode of pvp in this game, that ZOS can show at meetings and happenings to everyone, since Cyrodiil can be a laggy mess often with zergs pvdooring keeps and running after 1 player.. so would think they want to keep thinking about No-CP values also and us who have fun yet very functional builds with high extreme numbers on something.

Well. I could talk about how I loose over 2k Magicka in content where my max magicka is higher. But is 44k really considered stacking ? That is a rather normal number to me and even here, the changes will not be a delight.

It seems to me they only think about the most optimal case: Nightblade with free 8% magicka from passives, raid warhorn etc. etc. Those numbers only take into account the top of the top and one single build, while ignoring that everyone else will be nerfed by this.

Why are we so afraid of buffing people or giving them something good ? Why must everything get worse, more streamlined and less interesting every patch ?

I agree with you, as i also been enjoying making builds that have big benefit from the % racial bonus. Like a petsorc, pet damage scales from max magicka as an example. For pvp, why one would not wanna increase max magicka and pair it with balanced amount of health to play around with the new shield cap on max health %. Things like that, they seem to forget even are a possibility. I guess everyone should be using Spell Strategist and so on lol.

In another thread when i made an example from one nerf these changes do, the person there said that "but if you do a build like that, you dont have any damage.." (we talked about pvp build) as his argument that it actually is a buff, i had to point out that it was for a support build to keep using Rapids. I guess all on ESO are now PVE dps and we dont need options to build high extremes on something, that is still functional and reality on a PVP build that still works at No-CP also like it has so far. People see buffs on a pve dps view, of course there a +100 flat number can be a buff lol if not even build for that resource.

I am just amazed that they keep saying things are now balanced and more freedom. Truth: less freedom, still some races are very much "meta" for both stam and mag dps.

So what was gained from these changes? Answer: Sadness for lost opportunity to make things right this time, instead of Race Change token selling wheel of fortune with small flat numbers. "Round and round the wheel goes, who gets nerfed only time will show.." (and it will, when people see their stats in pvp in reality in same builds as now, when they were said to going to get "buffed")

heavier

the largest saltstorm of all times

ArgonianAustin

Please give argonians a max stamina buff. Or something else new like all the other races got instead of the exact same racials but nerfed.

soniku4ikblis

Came for the salt. Left feeling satisfied.

Sibenice

Moonsorrow wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

It is because some of their numbers come close to the current ones, especially in CP environment on an average build that is focused on spell/weapon damage. So for PVE they are close with the values if thinking around the meta builds there. But functional pvp builds can be extremes often that benefit more from % than from (too) small flat values.

But sadly, NO-CP pvp is (and can, luckily more freedom at pvp side of things) clearly forgotten in their mathematical approach to these values. They are putting CP buffs in, CP % values to maximum in their calculations and then showing us the results.

Battlegrounds is no-cp and i tend to think Battlegrounds as the pride and joy, the good child, the working mode of pvp in this game, that ZOS can show at meetings and happenings to everyone, since Cyrodiil can be a laggy mess often with zergs pvdooring keeps and running after 1 player.. so would think they want to keep thinking about No-CP values also and us who have fun yet very functional builds with high extreme numbers on something.

Well. I could talk about how I loose over 2k Magicka in content where my max magicka is higher. But is 44k really considered stacking ? That is a rather normal number to me and even here, the changes will not be a delight.

It seems to me they only think about the most optimal case: Nightblade with free 8% magicka from passives, raid warhorn etc. etc. Those numbers only take into account the top of the top and one single build, while ignoring that everyone else will be nerfed by this.

Why are we so afraid of buffing people or giving them something good ? Why must everything get worse, more streamlined and less interesting every patch ?

I agree with you, as i also been enjoying making builds that have big benefit from the % racial bonus. Like a petsorc, pet damage scales from max magicka as an example. For pvp, why one would not wanna increase max magicka and pair it with balanced amount of health to play around with the new shield cap on max health %. Things like that, they seem to forget even are a possibility. I guess everyone should be using Spell Strategist and so on lol.

In another thread when i made an example from one nerf these changes do, the person there said that "but if you do a build like that, you dont have any damage.." (we talked about pvp build) as his argument that it actually is a buff, i had to point out that it was for a support build to keep using Rapids. I guess all on ESO are now PVE dps and we dont need options to build high extremes on something, that is still functional and reality on a PVP build that still works at No-CP also like it has so far. People see buffs on a pve dps view, of course there a +100 flat number can be a buff lol if not even build for that resource.

I am just amazed that they keep saying things are now balanced and more freedom. Truth: less freedom, still some races are very much "meta" for both stam and mag dps.

So what was gained from these changes? Answer: Sadness for lost opportunity to make things right this time, instead of Race Change token selling wheel of fortune with small flat numbers. "Round and round the wheel goes, who gets nerfed only time will show.." (and it will, when people see their stats in pvp in reality in same builds as now, when they were said to going to get "buffed")

Agreed, as a pet sorc who does mostly solo content and pug vet dungeons I'll be losing nearly 2400 magicka. That's pretty significant. And the spell damage doesn't help me that much as pets do not scale from that. I'd been considering swapping off pet after the nerf to necropotence but I can't afford to replace my gold necro rings with something else so I didn't. Further nerfs may make it not okay for me to pug vet dungeons according to the populace.

Sure, it's maybe a buff for people in raids and such who are synchronizing their buffs but even then I agree with you that I don't see how this is allowing more freedom. And it's not like I'm even running a weird build.

Moonsorrow

Sibenice wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

It is because some of their numbers come close to the current ones, especially in CP environment on an average build that is focused on spell/weapon damage. So for PVE they are close with the values if thinking around the meta builds there. But functional pvp builds can be extremes often that benefit more from % than from (too) small flat values.

But sadly, NO-CP pvp is (and can, luckily more freedom at pvp side of things) clearly forgotten in their mathematical approach to these values. They are putting CP buffs in, CP % values to maximum in their calculations and then showing us the results.

Battlegrounds is no-cp and i tend to think Battlegrounds as the pride and joy, the good child, the working mode of pvp in this game, that ZOS can show at meetings and happenings to everyone, since Cyrodiil can be a laggy mess often with zergs pvdooring keeps and running after 1 player.. so would think they want to keep thinking about No-CP values also and us who have fun yet very functional builds with high extreme numbers on something.

Well. I could talk about how I loose over 2k Magicka in content where my max magicka is higher. But is 44k really considered stacking ? That is a rather normal number to me and even here, the changes will not be a delight.

It seems to me they only think about the most optimal case: Nightblade with free 8% magicka from passives, raid warhorn etc. etc. Those numbers only take into account the top of the top and one single build, while ignoring that everyone else will be nerfed by this.

Why are we so afraid of buffing people or giving them something good ? Why must everything get worse, more streamlined and less interesting every patch ?

I agree with you, as i also been enjoying making builds that have big benefit from the % racial bonus. Like a petsorc, pet damage scales from max magicka as an example. For pvp, why one would not wanna increase max magicka and pair it with balanced amount of health to play around with the new shield cap on max health %. Things like that, they seem to forget even are a possibility. I guess everyone should be using Spell Strategist and so on lol.

In another thread when i made an example from one nerf these changes do, the person there said that "but if you do a build like that, you dont have any damage.." (we talked about pvp build) as his argument that it actually is a buff, i had to point out that it was for a support build to keep using Rapids. I guess all on ESO are now PVE dps and we dont need options to build high extremes on something, that is still functional and reality on a PVP build that still works at No-CP also like it has so far. People see buffs on a pve dps view, of course there a +100 flat number can be a buff lol if not even build for that resource.

I am just amazed that they keep saying things are now balanced and more freedom. Truth: less freedom, still some races are very much "meta" for both stam and mag dps.

So what was gained from these changes? Answer: Sadness for lost opportunity to make things right this time, instead of Race Change token selling wheel of fortune with small flat numbers. "Round and round the wheel goes, who gets nerfed only time will show.." (and it will, when people see their stats in pvp in reality in same builds as now, when they were said to going to get "buffed")

Agreed, as a pet sorc who does mostly solo content and pug vet dungeons I'll be losing nearly 2400 magicka. That's pretty significant. And the spell damage doesn't help me that much as pets do not scale from that. I'd been considering swapping off pet after the nerf to necropotence but I can't afford to replace my gold necro rings with something else so I didn't. Further nerfs may make it not okay for me to pug vet dungeons according to the populace.

Sure, it's maybe a buff for people in raids and such who are synchronizing their buffs but even then I agree with you that I don't see how this is allowing more freedom. And it's not like I'm even running a weird build.

Yeah, my pvp builds just came as an example but these will also affect pve side too of course. To me it is been a huge surprise since these came public that how all these flat numbers are just for some meta setups in current situation and everything else have been forgotten to even exist, pvp builds & pve high max stat builds.

Like someone came up with these numbers who does not know the reality on many pvp builds and that not everyone at pve plays with only spell/weapon damage setups. Almost as if the one who did these forgot the other side of the coin even being there. Freedom. These days more freedom means less. Unless freedom means nerfs to any other playstyle than the current mathematical meta setup.

I bet these numbers came from pve raid people with optimal meta builds as a benchmark. But.. is it not like 2% the amount of highend pve raid people in the game, and everyone else play totally differently and solo, and small group, not have raid buffs.

I am honestly amazed. And so will many when they see the nerfs in reality that these bring to their current builds.

Dracane

@Moonsorrow These changes were supervised by high end raidplayers. So this comes as no surprise and I wouldn't mind it, if these changes wouldn't seem so selfish. They may be favorable for 5%, but ignore the other 95%.

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO

Dracane wrote: »

@Moonsorrow These changes were supervised by high end raidplayers. So this comes as no surprise and I wouldn't mind it, if these changes wouldn't seem so selfish. They may be favorable for 5%, but ignore the other 95%.

You are not the 95%. Your build is not average.

Sibenice wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

It is because some of their numbers come close to the current ones, especially in CP environment on an average build that is focused on spell/weapon damage. So for PVE they are close with the values if thinking around the meta builds there. But functional pvp builds can be extremes often that benefit more from % than from (too) small flat values.

But sadly, NO-CP pvp is (and can, luckily more freedom at pvp side of things) clearly forgotten in their mathematical approach to these values. They are putting CP buffs in, CP % values to maximum in their calculations and then showing us the results.

Battlegrounds is no-cp and i tend to think Battlegrounds as the pride and joy, the good child, the working mode of pvp in this game, that ZOS can show at meetings and happenings to everyone, since Cyrodiil can be a laggy mess often with zergs pvdooring keeps and running after 1 player.. so would think they want to keep thinking about No-CP values also and us who have fun yet very functional builds with high extreme numbers on something.

Well. I could talk about how I loose over 2k Magicka in content where my max magicka is higher. But is 44k really considered stacking ? That is a rather normal number to me and even here, the changes will not be a delight.

It seems to me they only think about the most optimal case: Nightblade with free 8% magicka from passives, raid warhorn etc. etc. Those numbers only take into account the top of the top and one single build, while ignoring that everyone else will be nerfed by this.

Why are we so afraid of buffing people or giving them something good ? Why must everything get worse, more streamlined and less interesting every patch ?

I agree with you, as i also been enjoying making builds that have big benefit from the % racial bonus. Like a petsorc, pet damage scales from max magicka as an example. For pvp, why one would not wanna increase max magicka and pair it with balanced amount of health to play around with the new shield cap on max health %. Things like that, they seem to forget even are a possibility. I guess everyone should be using Spell Strategist and so on lol.

In another thread when i made an example from one nerf these changes do, the person there said that "but if you do a build like that, you dont have any damage.." (we talked about pvp build) as his argument that it actually is a buff, i had to point out that it was for a support build to keep using Rapids. I guess all on ESO are now PVE dps and we dont need options to build high extremes on something, that is still functional and reality on a PVP build that still works at No-CP also like it has so far. People see buffs on a pve dps view, of course there a +100 flat number can be a buff lol if not even build for that resource.

I am just amazed that they keep saying things are now balanced and more freedom. Truth: less freedom, still some races are very much "meta" for both stam and mag dps.

So what was gained from these changes? Answer: Sadness for lost opportunity to make things right this time, instead of Race Change token selling wheel of fortune with small flat numbers. "Round and round the wheel goes, who gets nerfed only time will show.." (and it will, when people see their stats in pvp in reality in same builds as now, when they were said to going to get "buffed")

Agreed, as a pet sorc who does mostly solo content and pug vet dungeons I'll be losing nearly 2400 magicka.
.

Show me how you are.

Dracane

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

@Moonsorrow These changes were supervised by high end raidplayers. So this comes as no surprise and I wouldn't mind it, if these changes wouldn't seem so selfish. They may be favorable for 5%, but ignore the other 95%.

You are not the 95%. Your build is not average.

Yes, I am part of the 95%. Part of those people who are not high end raiders.
Everyone who is not them is the 95% and many of them will loose out more than they gain.

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO

Dracane wrote: »

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

@Moonsorrow These changes were supervised by high end raidplayers. So this comes as no surprise and I wouldn't mind it, if these changes wouldn't seem so selfish. They may be favorable for 5%, but ignore the other 95%.

You are not the 95%. Your build is not average.

Yes, I am part of the 95%. Part of those people who are not high end raiders.
Everyone who is not them is the 95% and many of them will loose out more than they gain.

Show me your build. Show me I am wrong. @Masel has soild math. You need to show me how your build is part of the 95%

Use Superstar, https://www.esoui.com/downloads/info946-SuperStar-CharacterBuilder.html, and combat metrics, https://www.esoui.com/downloads/info1360-CombatMetrics.html screenshot them and upload them to imgur.com.

Sibenice

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

Show me how you are.

With my current set up I have 57338 magicka in my mainhand and 50773 magicka in my offhand. Removing the passive and adding 2000 flat gives me 52605 in mainhand and 46040 in my offhand. That's a difference of 4733 magicka and if you subtract 2000 you get 2733, aka nearly 2400.

It may change a bit depending on other percentage stuff, but it'll still be significant.

Ramber

Nerfing regen again? well thats gonna be fun. Are they gonna make another food to compensate like they made Dubious Cameron throne and witchmothers potent brew to make up for the last regen nerfs?

RPGplayer13579

RPGplayer13579 wrote: »

I know this may be a hell no type of request, but can I have a free change of class token? I had my Dark Elf character as a Dragon Knight because of the Destructive Ancestry and the 7% Flame damage bonus that went with it. And since that will soon go away can I change her to either a Nightblade or maybe Necromancer.

Just to get the attention of anyone @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_BillE @ZOS_KaiSchober @ZOS_JessicaFolsom. For those who chose either a race or class based on what the racial passives were. Can we have a free change of class or race token? Thank you.

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO

Sibenice wrote: »

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

Show me how you are.

With my current set up I have 57338 magicka in my mainhand and 50773 magicka in my offhand. Removing the passive and adding 2000 flat gives me 52605 in mainhand and 46040 in my offhand. That's a difference of 4733 magicka and if you subtract 2000 you get 2733, aka nearly 2400.

It may change a bit depending on other percentage stuff, but it'll still be significant.

What sets and mundai and cp and armor and skills, etc etc. You are just giving me your end numbers. Need to peer review your calculations before I believe them.

Sibenice

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

Sibenice wrote: »

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

Show me how you are.

With my current set up I have 57338 magicka in my mainhand and 50773 magicka in my offhand. Removing the passive and adding 2000 flat gives me 52605 in mainhand and 46040 in my offhand. That's a difference of 4733 magicka and if you subtract 2000 you get 2733, aka nearly 2400.

It may change a bit depending on other percentage stuff, but it'll still be significant.

What sets and mundai and cp and armor and skills, etc etc. You are just giving me your end numbers. Need to peer review your calculations before I believe them.

Sets are Julianos/Necropotance legendary with full legendary magicka enchants where they can be. Traits are arcane, weapon infused and divines. Mundus is The Mage. I am at 638 CP, but as far as I'm aware CP only affects attribute and item stats, correct me if I'm wrong, but that shouldn't effect skill related ones. I did forget that Bound aegis and Inner Light give percentage increases so you caught me, a difference of 260 and only on my front bar.

Lord_Eomer

Argonianwerecroc212 wrote: »

I feel like you nerfed Argonians too much and gave khajiits a weak buff

Argonians are balanced, its ZOS fault to made you guys addictive of huge buffs,

Mistakes have to be corrected.

Lord_Eomer

Dracane wrote: »

Moonsorrow wrote: »

@Masel

Masel wrote: »

Just a quick statement on the people focusing on % vs. flat value shere.

I think it is quite dangerous how much unreflected feedback we get from people who say they got nerfed hard. The only race that got nerfed overall is argonian, and there is a reason for that. the rest do benefit from the changes, so even if you keep the race you had before, you do NOT lose anything at all when you take all the passives into account.

If that only was true. Your examples are for generic pve builds so the flat bonus numbers are like counted from pretty much base and for pve dps point of view.

So.. when one goes to pvp builds, and have been using the % bonus strengths to each race to build high on them to make setup based on that, then adding other things according to it. There are BIG nerfs and you should not try to deny them, or have you all forgot pvp builds completely? Not everyone plays with generic youtube shackle/seventh/Blood Spawn builds at pvp. There are big nerfs and way less versatility now with the new flat number approach, since there are not many % based bonuses on sets.

Example: Nord, No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : it had % based damage reduction, for pvp that actually did mitigate against bleeds, it had % Healthy Recovery. You could make big hp regen with that +20%. With the changes like these now on this preview. Nerfed in both cases.

Example: Khajiit. No-CP (Battlegrounds/Sotha Sil) : Health regen flat number +100 vs old +20% hp recovery. Now a simple question: Is old +20% hp recovery more with Troll King monster set, than the new +100? +20% wins by a large margin. Most of those type builds have more flat recovery bonuses on top of Troll King, so its even more.

I rest my case.

So what is "quite dangerous"? To let people know the truth that their pvp builds ARE getting nerfed and the flat values were clearly made for PVE base values in mind with low to average numbers in certain areas. Things will be nerfed hard on pvp builds. It is a fact.

That is my impression as well. I really mean no harm to anyone. Accusing someone is the last thing I want to do. But I can't help thinking that Masel tries to lie to us. All those calculations are not based on reality and are purely theoretical, hence not representative of the real results.

I think, they try to sell us nerfs as buffs.

Well @Masel is a very respected community member, he is trying to help not misguiding.

You are very harsh and disrespectful. Please try to show some good manners.

Masel

Dracane wrote: »

@Moonsorrow These changes were supervised by high end raidplayers. So this comes as no surprise and I wouldn't mind it, if these changes wouldn't seem so selfish. They may be favorable for 5%, but ignore the other 95%.

I am baffled by your statements. You accuse all of us to be biased and only think of PvE, even though we have a few very good PvP players among the reps that actually welcome these changes. I'll let you think whatever you want... I don't have the time or nerve to try and convince people that do not want to be convinced.

Lovelocke

Masel wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

@Moonsorrow These changes were supervised by high end raidplayers. So this comes as no surprise and I wouldn't mind it, if these changes wouldn't seem so selfish. They may be favorable for 5%, but ignore the other 95%.

I am baffled by your statements. You accuse all of us to be biased and only think of PvE, even though we have a few very good PvP players among the reps that actually welcome these changes. I'll let you think whatever you want... I don't have the time or nerve to try and convince people that do not want to be convinced.

I appreciate your posts. I think the maths behind these changes is quite complicated and people are taking a simplistic view, deducting one figure from another and believing that's all there is to it. You've tried to explain the finer details, so thank you.

Wolfchild07

Werewolves cannot use weapon or class abilities. The changes giving these types of passives could be thought out a little more.