How the LA/HA changes fail to fulfill ZOS's stated goals and what could be done instead?

Thogard

Code's suggestion was perfect. Great idea, and excellently communicated.

Lughlongarm

Good read.

Regardless to the finale resolution, there are some keepers that I think should implemented.

1)Quicker heavy attacks on staves and bow. Feels much smoother.

2)Full movement speed when charging heavy attacks on staves and bow. - Life changer.

3)LA/HA scale with the highest stats - More build options always fun.

4)Different interactions with Off-balance. off-balance feels like an actual mechanic now. Plz also make Off-balance unpurgable.

Toc de Malsvi

@code65536

code65536 wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Very good suggestions. I firmly think basic attacks should not restore resources. We have potions, passives, and spells to do that. Basic attacks should be attacks not sustain.

It’s fine to have spells that work with basic attacks to give sustain. But it’s ridiculous to get resources from stabbing someone. We aren’t leeching them from the target being stabbed, it just doesn’t make sense outside of spells, potions, passives.

Sure, from a conceptual point of view, it seems silly for any basic attack--whether it be light, heavy, or medium--to return resources.

But from a practical point of view, it's something that I like. Let's say that you are out of resources. Maybe you're in a dungeon PUG where the healer doesn't understand what Ele Drain is. Maybe you're fighting the Pinnacle Factotum or that boss in Fungal Grotto II and they just did an ability that drained all your magicka. Maybe your tank had died and, as a stamina DD, you suddenly found yourself needing to dodge a lot of attacks.

What are your options here? Potions? But potions have long cooldowns. Passives? What kind of passives? How would they work? Can they provide you with a burst of sustain to get you back into the fight? Spells? What kind of spells? And are people going to be convinced to give up one of their precious bar slots for it?

What is nice about heavy attacks restoring resources is that if you are out of resources and thus you can't do anything, you can at least heavy attack a couple of times and get back enough to get yourself back into action. Let's say you're a tank, and you've run out of stam. Currently, on the Live server, you can do a single 1H&S heavy attack (which takes only 0.8s) and get back 2830 stamina (with 12% in Tenacity in CP) if you suddenly need stamina in a pinch. You can't rely on potions because of the cooldown. You can't rely on passive regeneration because blocking stops that.

If you're fighting the penultimate boss in Fungal Grotto II, and he just finished draining all your magicka, what can you do to get yourself back into the fight? How long do you have to wait for your magicka regeneration to get you back enough resources to let you cast something? Even the light-attack resource return currently on the PTS would be very unsatisfactory here--if your spammable costs 2000, how many light attacks do you have to do before you can get enough to get back into the fight with a single spammable? With the current heavy attack resource return, one heavy attack will get you enough for one spammable.

You're right that basic attacks restoring resources seems a bit weird. But I think it is a good system from a practical standpoint. In any case, for a game with a fast-paced combat system, there needs to be some way for someone who has run out of resources to get back a burst of resources so that they can "get back into the game" in a reasonable amount of time rather than idling around waiting for their resource bar to slowly fill.

This is something that would be lost with the current PTS changes--yes, light attacks restoring resources would make it less likely that you run into an out-of-resource scenario in the first place (if you're one of those players that weave well), but if you do run out of resources, you're kinda screwed. Even with increased resource return with consecutive light attacks, it would still take a number of light attacks to get enough resources to fire off one spammable.

And so if resource return were to be stripped from basic attacks, as you and a number of others suggest, then what would you propose as a solution for someone to get back into the fight after they've run out? Potions have cooldowns, skills require bar slots, and passives are, well, passive and not something that a player can actively do when such a need arises...

I think you are not considering changes to the current system of resource returns. Your analysis seems pinpointed on the current system. The current system is designed and balanced around you getting resources from basic attacks. Of course there would be situations that may be overly punishing if you ran out of resources with the current system.

If the basic attacks are changing then the resource options from potions, spells, and passives could also change to accommodate this.

---

code65536 wrote: »

But from a practical point of view, it's something that I like. Let's say that you are out of resources. Maybe you're in a dungeon PUG where the healer doesn't understand what Ele Drain is. Maybe you're fighting the Pinnacle Factotum or that boss in Fungal Grotto II and they just did an ability that drained all your magicka. Maybe your tank had died and, as a stamina DD, you suddenly found yourself needing to dodge a lot of attacks.

What are your options here? Potions? But potions have long cooldowns.

Considering potions, these changes are only a problem because in the past dps have chugged potions as a way to maintain buffs than sustain. If anything this should point the need to change potions from essentially pure buff maintenance for dps. If potions were used more similarly as they are in PVP, as a need based option, then they could actually address many of these issues stated here.

---

code65536 wrote: »

But from a practical point of view, it's something that I like. Let's say that you are out of resources. Maybe you're in a dungeon PUG where the healer doesn't understand what Ele Drain is. Maybe you're fighting the Pinnacle Factotum or that boss in Fungal Grotto II and they just did an ability that drained all your magicka. Maybe your tank had died and, as a stamina DD, you suddenly found yourself needing to dodge a lot of attacks.

Spells? What kind of spells? And are people going to be convinced to give up one of their precious bar slots for it?

Changing bars for a different skill is not actually a problem. This has been done throughout the game when needed. Mag dps have slotted AOE purges, Shields, or defensive ults when needed. Stam dps have slotted Vigor, Rapids, or defensive/utility ults when needed. The argument that players will have to change skills is not a good one.

---

code65536 wrote: »

What is nice about heavy attacks restoring resources is that if you are out of resources and thus you can't do anything, you can at least heavy attack a couple of times and get back enough to get yourself back into action. Let's say you're a tank, and you've run out of stam. Currently, on the Live server, you can do a single 1H&S heavy attack (which takes only 0.8s) and get back 2830 stamina (with 12% in Tenacity in CP) if you suddenly need stamina in a pinch. You can't rely on potions because of the cooldown. You can't rely on passive regeneration because blocking stops that.

This quite literally can be addressed by potions, skills, or passives. DK's already have a passive which restores stamina on EH skill usage. It is far from impossible for passives to be adjusted to allow for this. Potions if used dynamically instead of on CD literally serve this exact purpose. S&B ultimate gives you free blocking for 6 seconds during which you can regen stamina, admittedly a small amount. I don't think you have addressed why this need could not be filled by potions, skills, and passives.

---

code65536 wrote: »

If you're fighting the penultimate boss in Fungal Grotto II, and he just finished draining all your magicka, what can you do to get yourself back into the fight? How long do you have to wait for your magicka regeneration to get you back enough resources to let you cast something? Even the light-attack resource return currently on the PTS would be very unsatisfactory here--if your spammable costs 2000, how many light attacks do you have to do before you can get enough to get back into the fight with a single spammable? With the current heavy attack resource return, one heavy attack will get you enough for one spammable.

This is as I pointed out above a problem based on the current system of Magicka usage and recovery.

---

Again as I pointed out above the need to slot sustain skills is not a problem. Players will slot what they need to deal with what they have to. In PVP the combat is quite fast paced and many players slot sustain skills.

For a moment consider that potions were not being chugged on CD simply to keep buffs up, and could instead by used dynamically as need required. This would directly alleviate some concerns over resource management. Then consider that many classes already have built in ways to restore resources. I don't think this is then the issue it is made out to be.

---

I want to stress that this scenario is only one of many possible ways to address these issues. However, I can easily see a system in which players retain high levels of recovery when they have not actively cast a combat spell. Such that by reverting to basic attacks for 3-4 seconds could refill a large portion of their resources. This would entail them having to make choices as to whether they really needed to cast a defensive spell or ability, i.e. Absorb/heal/block/Rapids etc, or whether they should avoid using skills for a moment to refill resources.

The above scenario is essentially the same as getting resources from basic attacks, with one KEY difference. The recovery of resources is not actually tied to basic attacks as if you are somehow leeching resources from targets.

Toc de Malsvi

@code65536

code65536 wrote: »

. . .
For the "upper class", yes, it's an outright nerf to power. That can be somewhat compensated for by shifting their builds further away from sustain.

But what does this do for the power gap between the "middle class" and the "upper class". Both groups will be hit hard by this, and it's not clear that they will be affected in a way that reduces the relative power gap.

And so I would like to take a moment now to talk about the Morrowind combat changes. Back when those changes were made, @ZOS_RichLambert said on ESO Live that they had two goals with the Morrowind combat changes. First, they wanted people to think about sustain again. And second, they wanted to reduce the power gap. Well, these changes seem to fly in the face of the notion that sustain should be relevant. But more importantly, the Morrowind combat changes increased the power gap between players. Yes, the sustain nerfs hit the power of the "upper class" hard. But it also hit the "middle class" even more. If you think about it, when resources are tight, then players who are more efficient at resource usage will have an advantage. Instead of using a dynamic rotation, are you using an easy static rotation that results in a couple of DoTs being recast a little early? That's wasted resources. Did you accidentally step into red and thus need to cast a self-heal to compensate for your mistake? That's wasted resources. Did you miss a light attack and thus miss out on its resource-free damage? That's less damage per resource spent.

Can you say, without any doubt, that these light/heavy attack changes will hurt the "upper class" more than it hurts the "middle class"? If not, then you're not actually closing the power gap, and this will be a repeat of the Morrowind fiasco.
. . .

One thing I wanted to point out here, based on my own understanding which may be incorrect.

My understanding is that the elite top end are not actually building for sustain at all as dps. They get the needed sustain from synergies, potions, and group support sets. It is also my understanding that the number of light attacks per second is highest at the top end and progressively lower as you go down the ranks of dps. That the immediate difference between the elite and the middle is the ability to efficiently weave light attacks with skills to the greatest effect.

With this understanding in mind I think we can definitively state that these changes will reduce the gap between the elite and the middle. If light attacks make up a greater portion of your dps then you will be disproportionately affected by their reduction in damage. Further, if the top already don't build for sustain then they cannot build anymore for damage. Those that can actually shift their builds for more damage are the middle.



That said this does not account for the gap from the top to the absolute bottom, those that only light attack. Nor does it account for the effect of the changes to PVP builds where sustain actually matters more.

mikemacon

This is a terrible suggestion, OP! Just terrible!! You oughtta be ashamed!!

...jk.

Thought provoking. Don't think I agree (keeping HAs with the same resource return as current if these changes are the direction the combat team is moving sort of defeats the purpose - perhaps reducing HA resource return by a fair chunk is better) as I honestly don't mind the way PTS combat feels currently with the current proposed changes, but good, well-though-out, well-put feedback.

Bravo Zulu.

Valenor

Code, this is perfect. Just saying so that this comment shows yet another player approves of these ideas. The more we are, the less likely they can ignore such a well put together post and fine tuning of their proposed changes..

LiquidPony

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

@code65536

code65536 wrote: »

. . .
For the "upper class", yes, it's an outright nerf to power. That can be somewhat compensated for by shifting their builds further away from sustain.

But what does this do for the power gap between the "middle class" and the "upper class". Both groups will be hit hard by this, and it's not clear that they will be affected in a way that reduces the relative power gap.

And so I would like to take a moment now to talk about the Morrowind combat changes. Back when those changes were made, @ZOS_RichLambert said on ESO Live that they had two goals with the Morrowind combat changes. First, they wanted people to think about sustain again. And second, they wanted to reduce the power gap. Well, these changes seem to fly in the face of the notion that sustain should be relevant. But more importantly, the Morrowind combat changes increased the power gap between players. Yes, the sustain nerfs hit the power of the "upper class" hard. But it also hit the "middle class" even more. If you think about it, when resources are tight, then players who are more efficient at resource usage will have an advantage. Instead of using a dynamic rotation, are you using an easy static rotation that results in a couple of DoTs being recast a little early? That's wasted resources. Did you accidentally step into red and thus need to cast a self-heal to compensate for your mistake? That's wasted resources. Did you miss a light attack and thus miss out on its resource-free damage? That's less damage per resource spent.

Can you say, without any doubt, that these light/heavy attack changes will hurt the "upper class" more than it hurts the "middle class"? If not, then you're not actually closing the power gap, and this will be a repeat of the Morrowind fiasco.
. . .

One thing I wanted to point out here, based on my own understanding which may be incorrect.

My understanding is that the elite top end are not actually building for sustain at all as dps. They get the needed sustain from synergies, potions, and group support sets. It is also my understanding that the number of light attacks per second is highest at the top end and progressively lower as you go down the ranks of dps. That the immediate difference between the elite and the middle is the ability to efficiently weave light attacks with skills to the greatest effect.

With this understanding in mind I think we can definitively state that these changes will reduce the gap between the elite and the middle. If light attacks make up a greater portion of your dps then you will be disproportionately affected by their reduction in damage. Further, if the top already don't build for sustain then they cannot build anymore for damage. Those that can actually shift their builds for more damage are the middle.



That said this does not account for the gap from the top to the absolute bottom, those that only light attack. Nor does it account for the effect of the changes to PVP builds where sustain actually matters more.

Can't say I agree.

First, there are a number of ways that top-end groups can sacrifice sustain for more damage.

In stam groups, the obvious thing is that they're going to do *much* more bash weaving.

Support can look to drop sets like Hircine and Worm and Hollowfang and focus on DPS-boosting sets. Same may be true of monster sets.

Players can look to incorporate skills or rotations that weren't sustainable before. Like ... Daedric Tomb on a sorc, or Whirling Blades on various stam setups. Some stam specs were already running non-optimal magicka-costing skills to aid with sustain, which may get dropped in favor of more spammables. Skills like Leeching Strikes/Netch/Dark Deal/Spell Sym can get dropped altogether.

Maybe False God sees less use and mag specs focus more on pure damage.

Stamnecros may be able to drop Lavafoot and reallocate attribute points into stamina.

Long story short, I think the idea that we can "definitively state that these changes will reduce the gap between the elite and the middle" is bunk. I don't think anything has fundamentally swung that direction. If anything I wouldn't be surprised if the opposite is true, especially at first as "top-end groups" are going to have their changes mapped out as soon as this hits Live and it will take some time for that information to percolate down through the playerbase. And even when they do, players who don't have high LA rates are not going to be able to incorporate all of these changes because they won't be able to sustain them.

We've just shifted the "skill gap" from raw damage to sustain ... and damage is a function of sustain. I don't think anything has changed.

karthrag_inak

This one thinks blocking should increase regen and be the primary source of resource restoration, with the caveat that if one actually blocks a hit, then it ends up costing resources.

Toc de Malsvi

LiquidPony wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

@code65536

code65536 wrote: »

. . .
For the "upper class", yes, it's an outright nerf to power. That can be somewhat compensated for by shifting their builds further away from sustain.

But what does this do for the power gap between the "middle class" and the "upper class". Both groups will be hit hard by this, and it's not clear that they will be affected in a way that reduces the relative power gap.

And so I would like to take a moment now to talk about the Morrowind combat changes. Back when those changes were made, @ZOS_RichLambert said on ESO Live that they had two goals with the Morrowind combat changes. First, they wanted people to think about sustain again. And second, they wanted to reduce the power gap. Well, these changes seem to fly in the face of the notion that sustain should be relevant. But more importantly, the Morrowind combat changes increased the power gap between players. Yes, the sustain nerfs hit the power of the "upper class" hard. But it also hit the "middle class" even more. If you think about it, when resources are tight, then players who are more efficient at resource usage will have an advantage. Instead of using a dynamic rotation, are you using an easy static rotation that results in a couple of DoTs being recast a little early? That's wasted resources. Did you accidentally step into red and thus need to cast a self-heal to compensate for your mistake? That's wasted resources. Did you miss a light attack and thus miss out on its resource-free damage? That's less damage per resource spent.

Can you say, without any doubt, that these light/heavy attack changes will hurt the "upper class" more than it hurts the "middle class"? If not, then you're not actually closing the power gap, and this will be a repeat of the Morrowind fiasco.
. . .

One thing I wanted to point out here, based on my own understanding which may be incorrect.

My understanding is that the elite top end are not actually building for sustain at all as dps. They get the needed sustain from synergies, potions, and group support sets. It is also my understanding that the number of light attacks per second is highest at the top end and progressively lower as you go down the ranks of dps. That the immediate difference between the elite and the middle is the ability to efficiently weave light attacks with skills to the greatest effect.

With this understanding in mind I think we can definitively state that these changes will reduce the gap between the elite and the middle. If light attacks make up a greater portion of your dps then you will be disproportionately affected by their reduction in damage. Further, if the top already don't build for sustain then they cannot build anymore for damage. Those that can actually shift their builds for more damage are the middle.



That said this does not account for the gap from the top to the absolute bottom, those that only light attack. Nor does it account for the effect of the changes to PVP builds where sustain actually matters more.

Can't say I agree.

First, there are a number of ways that top-end groups can sacrifice sustain for more damage.

In stam groups, the obvious thing is that they're going to do *much* more bash weaving.

Support can look to drop sets like Hircine and Worm and Hollowfang and focus on DPS-boosting sets. Same may be true of monster sets.

Players can look to incorporate skills or rotations that weren't sustainable before. Like ... Daedric Tomb on a sorc, or Whirling Blades on various stam setups. Some stam specs were already running non-optimal magicka-costing skills to aid with sustain, which may get dropped in favor of more spammables. Skills like Leeching Strikes/Netch/Dark Deal/Spell Sym can get dropped altogether.

Maybe False God sees less use and mag specs focus more on pure damage.

Stamnecros may be able to drop Lavafoot and reallocate attribute points into stamina.

Long story short, I think the idea that we can "definitively state that these changes will reduce the gap between the elite and the middle" is bunk. I don't think anything has fundamentally swung that direction. If anything I wouldn't be surprised if the opposite is true, especially at first as "top-end groups" are going to have their changes mapped out as soon as this hits Live and it will take some time for that information to percolate down through the playerbase. And even when they do, players who don't have high LA rates are not going to be able to incorporate all of these changes because they won't be able to sustain them.

We've just shifted the "skill gap" from raw damage to sustain ... and damage is a function of sustain. I don't think anything has changed.

It is entirely possible that there is more to shift to damage at the top than I am aware of. It was my understanding that those sustain skills had already been dropped. As well as that players were already pushing the limits of what was sustainable at the top end. Meaning my understanding was that players weren’t limited by sustain so much as what the maximum output of skills could be.

As to bashing though, I think that ZOS is going to have to make changes there if they still want to accomplish their goals of lowering the difference in output between players of different APM.

YandereGirlfriend

I am absolutely astounded by the number of people in these threads repeating "ZOS, please take away the sustain from Light Attacks and instead turn this patch into an unmitigated nerf."

Rather than pining for additional nerfs, perhaps take the opportunity to change your food or change your race or try out a new off-meta build that is suddenly much more viable, such as a Magicka Redguard or Stamina Breton.

And remember, the worries about bash-weaving only apply to Stamina builds. All of us Magicka players are over here entirely left out of that party because our Light Attacks don't return the type of resource that is used to bash. Our abilities also generally cost more and we have to wear 5-1-1 armor combinations that harm sustain whereas Stamina builds are generally much more flexible.

Please think of others before you call for nerfs. Just because you cannot think of a use for the extra sustain does not mean that it won't be appreciated by others. Be conscientious of your fellow players.

Slothylicious

I fundamentally disagree with ZOS's and OP's statement about the power gap being too wide and needing to be addressed.

I hope that this will be seen as additional feedback.

Here is the paragraph that states the issue before proposing solutions and what OP agrees 100% with:

There are, however, several drawbacks to this model as well. First, it tends to reward players for pushing buttons as quickly and efficiently as possible. Players with high Actions Per Minute (APM) significantly outperform those with low APM, as they have better up-time of abilities, higher mitigation, much higher DPS, and can simply move around the battlefield better in both PVE and PVP. While we believe it’s good to have a skill gap that promotes mastery, we also believe the gap as it currently exists is too wide, and that many players aren’t finding satisfaction in the climb. Additionally, we believe the over-reliance on a specific mechanic (light attack weaving) leaves less room for playstyle diversity, including lower-APM options. This is particularly evident in veteran content and PvP. Finally, the concept of using light attacks for damage and heavy attacks for restore is, quite simply, unintuitive – especially for less experienced players.

I disagree with almost everything that is said in this paragraph and will try to explain it point by point.

First, it tends to reward players for pushing buttons as quickly and efficiently as possible.

"Quickly" and "efficiently" are here put together but should be considered as two different concepts.

Pushing buttons as quickly as possible is a particularly inefficient way of achieving good results in this game. If you press a button or click your mouse extremely fast you will still obtain disastrous results.

Pushing buttons efficiently, which I personally interpret as in the right order with the right timing, will however do wonders for a low-skilled player to reach the next level and become somewhat decent, allowing them to access more content.

Players with high Actions Per Minute (APM) significantly outperform those with low APM, as they have better up-time of abilities, higher mitigation, much higher DPS, and can simply move around the battlefield better in both PVE and PVP.

I do agree with this. However, I think that it matters a lot less for players at the bottom. As I partially said above, knowledge of the game and understanding of simple rotations and fight mechanics will be enough for a low-skilled player to reach a higher tier of proficiency, without requiring a significantly higher APM.

It is true however that the higher the skill, the more APM will matter in terms of results.

While we believe it’s good to have a skill gap that promotes mastery, we also believe the gap as it currently exists is too wide

This is probably the part I most disagree with.

I believe that the size of the power gap it terms of raw numbers doesn't really matter for game design.

I even think that a higher relative gap is healthier for the game, because it allows all skill levels between two tiers of players, and thus a smoother transition from one to another.

What matters instead is the consistency of difficulty and how hard it is for a player to access more content by improving their skill. I will detail these concepts below.

and that many players aren’t finding satisfaction in the climb

This is completely wrong in my opinion.

Seeing practice pay off and watching numbers get higher because of it is extremely satisfying, at all levels of skill.

Putting the effort in seeking advice from more skilled players or external sources, and improving because of it, is also satisfying.

Additionally, we believe the over-reliance on a specific mechanic (light attack weaving) leaves less room for playstyle diversity, including lower-APM options.This is particularly evident in veteran content and PvP.

At low skill level, I think that reliance on light-attack weaving is not a factor, because it is not done anyway.

Players will wear different sets simply because they like them. They will distribute their attributes in different ways because they think it's right. They will use a variety of abilities because they think they're cool. None of that will probably be the most efficient way of playing, but it won't matter because it will be good enough to access the content they are used to.

I agree however that in veteran content and higher skill levels, less playstyle diversity can be observed, because skilled players will tend to do what is more efficient. But this will happen whatever mechanic is introduced to the game, light-attack weaving or not.

Finally, the concept of using light attacks for damage and heavy attacks for restore is, quite simply, unintuitive – especially for less experienced players.

I completely agree that light and heavy attacks having different effects doesn't make any sense. The difference between a heavy attack and a light attack should only be that they take longer and be more impactful.

However, it is also unintuitive for me that either light or heavy attacks should restore resources. I remember being puzzled when I started the game to see that heavy attacks could restore resources, when in most other games, including Skyrim, they cost resources instead. Resources are managed a different way in other games, and should be managed without relying on light or heavy attacks in Elder Scrolls Online.





I will now present two problematic concepts that can be seen as symptoms of the width of power gap between players according to ZOS and OP, but are in fact unrelated.



1. Inconsistency of difficulty within the same type of content.

In ESO, I would separate content into relative difficulty as follows:

- Overland content, with the exception of world bosses;
- Normal dungeons;
- Normal trials;
- Veteran dungeons;
- Veteran dungeons hard modes;
- Veteran trials;
- Veteran trials hard modes;
- Veteran dungeons trifecta achievements;
- Veteran trials trifecta achievements;
- World first clears on release, and score pushing for world records.

That is quite a number of different difficulties, and I think it allows for a reasonable number of levels of challenge.

Of course in practice, it is not as clear cut, especially when we compare the oldest and the most recent content. But I believe that is the idea behind what was intended.

Now, what I mean by consistency of difficulty, is that if one player is able to complete some content in one of these categories, with enough challenge to be engaging, then they should be able to complete all of this type of content.

I will give some examples of what was done or what should be done about this particular concept, and that in my opinion are not related to power gap:

- The nerf of Galchobhar in veteran Bloodroot Forge. People who could usually complete veteran content found this boss too difficult and it was preventing them from completing this dungeon, even though the relative difficulty should be the same. A change was made, and I think the difficulty of this boss was lowered significantly enough that more people should be able to complete the dungeon. It was a justified and well handled change.

- The cancroid boss in veteran Lair of Maarselok. In the same way that Galchobhar was too hard, this boss prevents people who are usually able to clear veteran dungeons from completing this one. The reason of this difficulty is the unreasonably high DPS requirement compared to that of other bosses in veteran dungeons. It should be nerfed accordingly.

- The nerf of veteran Halls of Fabrication. This change was made because it was observed that its completion rate was too low compared to other veteran trials, so was not consistent with content of the same difficulty. A number or nerfs was applied to most of the bosses in an attempt to make this trial more accessible. However for having completed this trial before and after the nerf, I don't think this change succeeded in addressing the problem, as I believe people who weren't able to complete this trial before would still not be able to.

- Godslayer. I think this achievement is unreasonably difficult, because it caters to score pushing teams and leave in the dirt groups that are usually able to obtain other trial trifectas with enough practice and determination, therefore is not consistent with content of the same difficulty. Content should not be made to please the very top of the elite, but instead be consistent with the difficulty of the same tier of content. Those elite teams should find their challenge and feeling of exclusiveness in achieving and fighting for world records that nobody else would dream to get.


None of those are results of a power gap that is too wide, but inconsistencies within the same difficulty of content.



2. Accessibility of content.

In a similar manner that different levels of content difficulties exist in ESO, players have different levels of skill that can be acquired in a variety of ways.

I would separate them in the following categories:
- Players who prefer to experience ESO by questing, fishing or roleplaying, will not complete normal dungeons by lack of skill or interest in PvE content;
- Players who complete normal dungeons, and are willing to integrate or form a group and learn basic mechanics will be able to complete normal trials;
- Players who put more practice into the game and have an understanding of more complex mechanics will be able to complete veteran dungeons.
The list goes on. You get the idea.

But here the problem is the following: how many people of one category will, with the intended amount of practice and learning, be able to access the next level of content?

It is often cited as an example that a majority of players that are interested in dungeons will find normal content accessible but veteran content unreasonably difficult. In this case, it means that veteran content is not accessible enough. In other words, it is not reachable by players of a skill level who want to access one level higher.

If you want 50% of players to access the next tier of difficulty but only 20% do, then it is not a problem of how much more power the players above have. It is because the amount of skill and practice required to pull oneself up and access the next level of content, does not match the increase in difficulty. In other words, the step is simply too high to climb.

On the other hand, if 100% of players at a given skill level are able to access the higher level of content without making progress in their gameplay, then the increase in difficulty doesn't mean anything and the contents blend together. The step is too easy to climb to present an interesting challenge.



In conclusion, how much difference of power there is between different tiers of players does not matter. It can be 20% more, it can be double, it can be 10 times more. What matters is that putting the adequate amount of time and effort into the game will be rewarded by the ability to access the totality of a higher difficulty level of content while still encountering a reasonable amount of challenge.



As an added note, as OP has explained I will say that I think that the solution proposed by ZOS is ineffective in both addressing the power gap or any of the points detailed above.

Jodynn

Tested on PTS

My thoughts are that 78% is too stark, 30% would be much better.
The sustain is welcome.
Less damage but at least I don't have to use spell symmetry.

Nice analysis as always @code65536

Valenor

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

And remember, the worries about bash-weaving only apply to Stamina builds. All of us Magicka players are over here entirely left out of that party because our Light Attacks don't return the type of resource that is used to bash. Our abilities also generally cost more and we have to wear 5-1-1 armor combinations that harm sustain whereas Stamina builds are generally much more flexible.

That's a valid point but let's not forget about Altmers' passive returning stam on mag toon.

Skjaldbjorn

Bash weaving may be more of a pertinent issue on Stam, but still a massive issue. It needs to be addressed even in the current climate. If this goes through, having bash damage exceed light attacks is absolutely absurd.

Elsonso

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

I am absolutely astounded by the number of people in these threads repeating "ZOS, please take away the sustain from Light Attacks and instead turn this patch into an unmitigated nerf."

This is not a "patch". ZOS is not rolling this out any time soon, if ever. This is just ZOS asking for people to play and provide feedback. We can speculate, suggest, or whatever else we think is constructive. If you don't like someone's suggestion, make your own. That way ZOS sees more sides to the feedback.

YandereGirlfriend

Skjaldbjorn wrote: »

Bash weaving may be more of a pertinent issue on Stam, but still a massive issue. It needs to be addressed even in the current climate. If this goes through, having bash damage exceed light attacks is absolutely absurd.

I agree, but I think that the superior solution is simply to reduce bash damage rather than nerfing sustain across-the-board.

Reducing bash damage targets the source of the problem (e.g. Stamina characters) in a way that doesn't have the unintended consequence of harming innocent Magicka characters.

Magicka classes already lag behind, generally speaking, Stamina classes in DPS (and get more of their damage from soon-to-be-nerfed Light Attacks) so making additional changes that exacerbate that gap is going to be poisonous to overall class balance.

Unrelated, but I wanted to give a shout-out to the inexplicable drive-by nerf that stamSorcs took as well. They were hardly overpowered--and just suffered the ignominy of seeing their longed-for Air Atronach given to a proc set--but hey, why not, right?

idk

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

@code65536

code65536 wrote: »

. . .
For the "upper class", yes, it's an outright nerf to power. That can be somewhat compensated for by shifting their builds further away from sustain.

But what does this do for the power gap between the "middle class" and the "upper class". Both groups will be hit hard by this, and it's not clear that they will be affected in a way that reduces the relative power gap.

And so I would like to take a moment now to talk about the Morrowind combat changes. Back when those changes were made, @ZOS_RichLambert said on ESO Live that they had two goals with the Morrowind combat changes. First, they wanted people to think about sustain again. And second, they wanted to reduce the power gap. Well, these changes seem to fly in the face of the notion that sustain should be relevant. But more importantly, the Morrowind combat changes increased the power gap between players. Yes, the sustain nerfs hit the power of the "upper class" hard. But it also hit the "middle class" even more. If you think about it, when resources are tight, then players who are more efficient at resource usage will have an advantage. Instead of using a dynamic rotation, are you using an easy static rotation that results in a couple of DoTs being recast a little early? That's wasted resources. Did you accidentally step into red and thus need to cast a self-heal to compensate for your mistake? That's wasted resources. Did you miss a light attack and thus miss out on its resource-free damage? That's less damage per resource spent.

Can you say, without any doubt, that these light/heavy attack changes will hurt the "upper class" more than it hurts the "middle class"? If not, then you're not actually closing the power gap, and this will be a repeat of the Morrowind fiasco.
. . .

One thing I wanted to point out here, based on my own understanding which may be incorrect.

My understanding is that the elite top end are not actually building for sustain at all as dps. They get the needed sustain from synergies, potions, and group support sets. It is also my understanding that the number of light attacks per second is highest at the top end and progressively lower as you go down the ranks of dps. That the immediate difference between the elite and the middle is the ability to efficiently weave light attacks with skills to the greatest effect.

With this understanding in mind I think we can definitively state that these changes will reduce the gap between the elite and the middle. If light attacks make up a greater portion of your dps then you will be disproportionately affected by their reduction in damage. Further, if the top already don't build for sustain then they cannot build anymore for damage. Those that can actually shift their builds for more damage are the middle.



That said this does not account for the gap from the top to the absolute bottom, those that only light attack. Nor does it account for the effect of the changes to PVP builds where sustain actually matters more.

Yes, the top groups, well-organized groups of the most experienced players in the game, do not struggle with sustain. But it has to do with the overall support. Run with a group not as well organized and that sustain drops. Even dealing with healers that struggle to get orbs out on CD makes a difference. This is likely one of the reasons Code is suggesting that Zos' idea fails to meet its goal.

That means the effect Zos' idea would have on reducing the cap is questionable since it means average to lower DPS will have to add sustain to their builds at the cost of stats that increase damage since they already struggle with LAs. In essence, that

Elsonso wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

I am absolutely astounded by the number of people in these threads repeating "ZOS, please take away the sustain from Light Attacks and instead turn this patch into an unmitigated nerf."

This is not a "patch". ZOS is not rolling this out any time soon, if ever. This is just ZOS asking for people to play and provide feedback. We can speculate, suggest, or whatever else we think is constructive. If you don't like someone's suggestion, make your own. That way ZOS sees more sides to the feedback.

This is correct. While it is clear Zos is considering making changes it does seem they merely want focused testing of this idea.

YandereGirlfriend

Elsonso wrote: »

This is not a "patch". ZOS is not rolling this out any time soon, if ever. This is just ZOS asking for people to play and provide feedback. We can speculate, suggest, or whatever else we think is constructive. If you don't like someone's suggestion, make your own. That way ZOS sees more sides to the feedback.

My suggestion is simply that we should keep the sustain that ZOS has offered us and not "look a gift-horse in the mouth" so to speak.

As for this not being a patch, I am not extending the developers that particular benefit of the doubt. They have spent valuable man-hours implementing these changes and it is exceedingly unlikely that they simply let the matter drop. Even with the overwhelmingly negative reaction to Iceheart, they still did not fully retreat from the changes.

Our "negotiating room" in terms of feedback revolves the precise details of the changes: "Will Light Attack damage be reduced by a more modest 50% or by the full 78%?", "Will Light and Medium attacks perhaps gain access to Empower?", and, as I fear, "How much should Light Attack sustain be reduced by?".

To which I reiterate: Let us keep the sustain, more is always better and we may as well get something positive in exchange for our damage.

D0PAMINE

I absolutely love this idea. It's very well thought out and is the right step into fine tuning combat without a massive overhaul that disrupts the flow of general gameplay.

zvavi

Here to support the post. Much better than the suggested changes, especially for mid and lower tier of tanks and healers.

Aelorin

I have tested 2 classes (magcro and magwarden) on PTS. I have to agree with the OP.

I am also confident that the proposed change as it is now on PTS WIL NOT decrease the skill gap. The high AP players will change glyphs and food for less sustain and more damage, while lower AP players will not be able to do that.

I think I am a mediocre player: My DPS dropped, and even with changing glyphs and/or food, I can not get my DPS on the same level as live which is about 30 k DPS.

I came to the same conclusion as the OP, but since he allready made such a great post about it, I just can say: I could not agree more!

FrancisCrawford

Faulgor wrote: »

The more I think about it and rearrange the deck chairs in my mind, the major stumbling block for an intuitive solution seems to be where to put active resource gain currently provided by heavy attacks. I'll take ZOS' change to increase resource gain via consecutive light attacks as a sign that they want to keep that aspect in the game, probably mainly for tanks and healers.

Trouble is, as pointed out in the OP, it doesn't really make a lot of sense why light attacks would restore resources but other basic attacks don't, and myself and others have added that it doesn't feel intuitive on any kind of basic attack to begin with.
So I find it really tough to combine ZOS' stated goal of an intuitive setup ("especially for less experienced players") with the apparent desire or even need to keep active resource gain on a universal combat ability ...

Unless a completely new one was added. Something that pauses combat/blocking/sprinting for a moment like heavy attacks did, just without actually attacking. Conceptually, we might think of it as catching your breath to regain stamina/magicka, which seems much more intuitive to me.
There are undoubtedly issues I'm not seeing right now, but would people be theoretically open to that?

E.g. I can foresee issues with button placement on a gamepad, playing with one myself, but if they found something for dodge roll and synergy use, I'm sure something can be found for ... "catch-breath".

You seem to be describing something like Meditate/Dark Conversion. (But without spending a skill bar slot or grinding Psijic.) Works for me. Long ago, when the game was young, I used to dart behind the rocks at dolmens to use Dark Conversion.

Psiioniic

I strongly disagree with ZOS proposed changes for LA/HAs.

This does not mean that new combat system proposed by ZOS is inferior by itself and for a new game, I think they would at least partially make more sense compared to heavy attacks restoring resources and the initially unintentional LA weaving.

But the current system works. Yes there is a powergap by APM. And I think it's good that there is one. A player pressing 1 same key every 5 seconds should not have best dps, this would be a sign of a severy imbalance between play skill and equipment quality if it was the case.

But please keep in mind there is also a powergap by adaption, which decreases in time as long as you keep the combat mechanics stable. A drastic change like the one proposed would completely change viable build.
This is not just training rotations on the target dummy but also involves farming new sets, investing a lot of gold etc.
If you are in a pro guild and raiding every day, you will have your all sets needed in a few days. If you have 100kk gold you have everything upgraded to gold a few days after the patch.
As a lets say new "middle class" player farming the sets will take months, if possible at all and if you are finally done, you guys from ZOS will strike again with the next patch.

I play since launch and while weaving was something obscure to a large fraction of player base in the first year or even two years, I think players have by now adapted to it. Even the super casual player that plays a few dungeons per week uses this now, misses probably 30% of the LAs.. but fine, still does enough damage for most of the content. That took the casual player a few month or maybe a year and it will take the casual player again the same time whereas the pro players will have adapted within a week, at maximum. What does it mean? You created a powergap.

If you want to reduce power gaps, keep the (running) system stable. (I guess there's enough other work to do, please work on new dungeon mechanics like in the last few DLC ones, they are great!)

code's suggestions are a way towards the right direction imo since they are less drastic, but I think there is just no change necessary on this matter.

TheFM

actosh wrote: »

That's the way to go zos. Please implement as written down by code. It would be intuitive, helping the low apm players and keep rewarding high apm players as well.
@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Gilliam @ZOS_RichLambert

Lmao, low APM players are still going to absolutely clobbered in pvp, and they are still going to be left behind in PvE because they cant weave properly to keep their sustain up, creating a massive dps loss when they run out of resources. xD. Codes makes sense, but is still an absolutely unnecessary change because people who are bad and refuse to practice, will continue to be bad and refuse to practice.

TheFM

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

@code65536 Thank you kindly for this constructive and well thought out feedback!

Or you know, you could have not touched what wasnt broken. And maybe fixed what was broken, namely performance and the absolute state of the EU servers.

TheFM

ShadowKyuubi wrote: »

Now, I am not the best player in the world. But I am still pretty good, LA ratios of 0.88-0.92 on average (not perfect, I know). I agree with most of what the OP is saying. Only issue I have comes with reducing LA damage at all and it leads to this simple question: "Why am I being nerfed because I can perform better than others?" I'm sitting here starring at the screen in disbelief because I never thought that this reasoning would ever come into play. I am potentially being nerfed for the simple reason of being a good player.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that there is a skill gap between players. I understand that we want to reduce that gap. However, from a strictly APM standpoint, this will not reduce the skill gap. It just reduces the dps gap, because that is what blanket nerfs like this do. I will still be more "skillful" than the "enter name here" casual that I was before this potential change happens. The only difference is now we're both doing less damage on a whole. Which no one wants. A new meta will form where XX dps is the new best, but now the "average" dps are doing (XX-15k) instead of (XX-20k).

Why are we constantly asking ourselves how we can lower the ceiling to help accommodate the floor? I applauded the OP for taking the first step and attempting to get away from this train of thought, but in the end, it is still there.

People who practice clearly shouldnt be rewarded for their practice xD.

Kelinur

ZOS please take code’s ideas and make it happen! As a casual player that is an average weaver I love this idea!!!

LiquidPony

karthrag_inak wrote: »

This one thinks blocking should increase regen and be the primary source of resource restoration, with the caveat that if one actually blocks a hit, then it ends up costing resources.

Strider__Roshin wrote: »

The fact that light and heavy attacks don't cost resources to cast is enough. No need to attach additional sustain to them.

I understand that these things may be more "intuitive" than basic attacks restoring resources, but ... come on guys. You have to operate within the content and combat design of the game to *some* extent.

Blocking as a resource restore tool doesn't remotely work. How would you restore resources in something like HoF Assembly General, where you are constantly being hit with spinning blades and meteors? How would a PvP tank ever un-turtle to restore resource when being mobbed by opponents?

There has to be some way to restore resources on-demand. The current system, where HAs do the trick, works really well ... because you have to wait for an opportunity to be able to charge a full heavy attack.

Slothylicious

I will reply to the original post part by part.

PART 1: ADDRESSING THE POWER GAP

(quote shortened for readability. You can read part 1 in the original post]

I fundamentally disagree with this part and ZOS's statement that the power gap is a problem that should be addressed. It is a misguided point of view and is confused with other essential concepts. I explain this in detail in post #134.

PART 2: LIGHT/HEAVY ATTACKS SHOULD BE INTUITIVE

(quote shortened for readability. You can read part 2 in the original post]

Like I already said in post #134, I completely agree with ZOS and OP that light and heavy attacks having different effects is unintuitive.

However, it is just as unintuitive to me that either light or heavy attacks should restore resources. Many others have expressed this opinion in this conversation.

OP argues in post #89 that basic attacks restoring resources is a convenient way to manage resource regeneration. It is indeed convenient, but from my point of view unnecessary.

Resources are managed a different way in other games, mostly through natural regeneration, items like potions, or skill effects. We already have all 3 in ESO. Even though they are currently not enough, those are the ones that should be adjusted so that resource management is possible but not trivial. This was well detailed by Toc de Malsvi in post #126.

Having too much sustain makes a resource system pointless in the first place. Having not enough sustain can make long fights impossible encounters. Resource management should be tweaked accordingly, but not through basic attacks.

PART 3: WHAT I WOULD DO IF I WAS A COMBAT DESIGNER

(quote shortened for readability. You can read part 3 in the original post]

The main reason for this post is to discuss OP's suggestions for what should be done, point by point, by analyzing their consequences.

1.Reduce light attack damage. Not by 78%. But by something more modest. 30%?

This will nerf absolutely everyone. Content will be less accessible for everyone, no matter how big or small the power gap between players is.

2.Increase the damage on consecutive (non-weaved) light/medium/heavy attacks.

This will not matter at mid and top tier levels, because no one will ever use consecutive basic attacks anyway. It will not matter for low tier players either, because it wouldn't be a big enough increase in power that they would be able to access more content. It only reduces the power gap between the players at the very bottom and players one tier higher, but not significantly enough that it has any impact whatsoever.

3.All light attacks restore resources. Something small like 50. (So for someone weaving perfectly, this would be a modest 100 regen.)
4.Keep the current Live levels of heavy attack resource return.
5.Medium attack damage and resource return will be somewhere between that of a light attack and heavy attack, scaling with the duration of the channel.

See part 2.

6.Make Empower affect all basic weapon attacks: light/medium/heavy.

This will have close to no effect. Apart from a secondary effect from certain abilities (the most noticeable probably being Wrecking Blow), nobody currently cares about empower as a buff given by external sources, which right now is only given by the Aegis of Galenwe set, that nobody uses.

7.Edited to add: Increase the damage of spammable abilities by an amount comparable to the reduction to light attack damage. This would maintain the current power level for people who weave successfully (thus effectively shifting damage from the basic attack to the ability), while increasing the power level for those who miss weaves (they would still do less damage, but the gap would be smaller).

This will buff everyone especially mid and top tier players. The accessibility of content will not change for the top tier because they can already access everything anyway. Just like the buff to consecutive basic attacks described in point 2, it will not be a significant enough change for low tier players to allow them to access more content. Only mid tier players might be able to access more content.


As I already said in post #134, in the end it all comes down to accessibility of content and consistency of difficulty within the same tier of content.

TheFM

LiquidPony wrote: »

karthrag_inak wrote: »

This one thinks blocking should increase regen and be the primary source of resource restoration, with the caveat that if one actually blocks a hit, then it ends up costing resources.

Strider__Roshin wrote: »

The fact that light and heavy attacks don't cost resources to cast is enough. No need to attach additional sustain to them.

I understand that these things may be more "intuitive" than basic attacks restoring resources, but ... come on guys. You have to operate within the content and combat design of the game to *some* extent.

Blocking as a resource restore tool doesn't remotely work. How would you restore resources in something like HoF Assembly General, where you are constantly being hit with spinning blades and meteors? How would a PvP tank ever un-turtle to restore resource when being mobbed by opponents?

There has to be some way to restore resources on-demand. The current system, where HAs do the trick, works really well ... because you have to wait for an opportunity to be able to charge a full heavy attack.

The players pushing for these changes to go live are not objective at all. They are just happy people who have put time into the game are getting mega shafted. That is it.