Patch Notes 6.0.4

Septimus_Magna

kojou wrote: »

I don't think the whole community is as united on the Vampire changes as you think they are. Is it exactly what I wanted? No. Is it a new and potentially interested play style? Yes, and I think we should give it a chance.

The 2 biggest things that I have a personal gripe about this patch are the changes to VAS Destro and the fact that Roaring Opportunist is the new magicka DPS set and it is so underwhelming. I am annoyed with this, but as far as previous releases go this is pretty minor and I can accept that they had more important things to address.

I also am not overly impressed with the Antiquities system, but I can mostly ignore that and just enjoy the new zone and new story.

For the majority of the players vamp is only viable during overland content because its nearly impossible to die there. Maybe some players will be good enough to get a dmg boost out of Blood Frenzy but for most it will only increase the rate of dying.

The vAS destro was fixed on mag DKs, meaning combustion restored more magicka than intended from dubble proccing burning. At the same it was nerfed by changing the proc for the perfected version to every 3rd cast down from every 2nd cast. So for mag DKs this is nerf in dmg output and sustain which makes a big difference.

ZOS repeats history once again by fixing and nerfing in the same iteration and succeeds to make the perfected vAS destro completely useless.

I also dont understand why there are new useless sets introduced, it seems the item set power-coefficient calculations are not very accurate...

Alchimiste1

I honestly think they don’t listen to feedback at all, they just roll out whatever change they want and that’s that.

Cast times on ults need to go

Nerf to bash damage is a terrible idea(gg stamblade)

Negate feedback on surprise attack stun ? Who cares.

Changes to off balance duration made fights last much longer because the kill window appears less often.

Rip perfected asylum staff, just another high end item that is now Decon material.

Stamcro balanced class?

Class identity is at an all time low, it was nice that mag dk has a unique setup with elf bane + asylum. What they should do is create more unique setups for other classes.

Imagine creating a class rep program filled with people who actually play the game well, taking all their advise and then throwing it in the garbage disposal. Seriously they didn’t even have to do anything except listen to the ideas of these persons.

Also whatever targeting change they did this patch has made this the worst performing patch that I have ever played. I think this is my biggest issue. Casting executioner feels like a 50/50 sometimes.

Davadin

Shadowasrial wrote: »

I’m not one to defend the devs, quite the opposite usually. However in this patch I must say that we are forgetting that they like other businesses are probably working at a much lower work capacity as they normally do. With limited manpower they can only change so much during the virus without risking months of a utterly broken game . I would expect there to be much more changes that we are hoping for next dlc assuming this virus is finally over.

just 1 open letter from FIror saying, hey, guys, we're understaffed, and we wanna make sure QoL doesn't get disrupted, so we're discounting a few things from what we promised before...

that's it.

Jayroo

I remember when they changed aoe damage and everyone got pissed and vowed to not play. The next couple patches changed the "fixes" they made. While it's not ideal it's what they do and people get shocked and quit over and over again.

same goes to the eu servers; they continue to be messed up and people continue to play and s**t post

if missing out on mag/stam regen is THAT upsetting to you, perhaps its best you wait for new world to come out so you can complain over at their forums instead /blackdesert.jpeg

YandereGirlfriend

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

BeefyMrTips wrote: »

At this point, it’s not the community vs the community. It’s the community vs the devs.. in what world of business do you ever want this happening? You can’t please everybody, but surely not pleasing anybody is bad business.

There's no such thing as "the community".
There's "the players".
Then there's what the players say, and there's what the players do. And what players say is more often than not totally inconsistent with what they do. Also, not everyone speaks, but everyone does things and makes choices.
ZOS are the only ones to know exactly what we do and don't do, and they're right, in my opinion, to wait and see what we (all players statistically speaking) do instead of taking as "true" what a very small portion of us (the forum writers) say. They can only take it as a potential qualitative explanation for the figures they (will) see.

TL/DR : you can't say "nobody's pleased". All you can say is "Most of the people who write on the forums aren't pleased". Which is entirely different.

You're arguing semantics but the most important implication of your stance is this: Why even bother to have a PTS feedback process to begin with then?

By definition, your testing pool will never be the same as your total pool of users but you are saying to throw out the input of the former because they are not identical in membership with the latter.

This makes no sense, as it would necessitate releasing changes completely untested to the general user pool and would affirmatively choose to release not just basic bugs and edge-case issues but also entire train-wrecks of flawed mechanics and design. In other words, Beta testing exists for very good reason.

Unfortunately, you can't get statistically balanced demographics for the testing pool because the system is opt-in rather than a random sampling and that sort of selection bias is then impossible to eliminate.

People that self-select are more likely to be passionate and more experienced players and, in general, that's probably a good thing. Experienced players are a good "vanguard" group for screening most changes, but, of course, certain types of changes (such as changes that penalize experienced players and reward newer players) have the potential to confound that.

In general though, if your testing group is largely protesting a change it is very likely for a valid reason and, even if they ultimately disagree, a wise developer would do well to at least engage with the issues that are raised. Otherwise you risk releasing a truly disastrous product and potentially jeopardizing your sales.

It is basically the testing equivalent of Pascal's Wager: even if you believe that the testers are full of it, the downside of at least listening to their issues is very small while the risk of dismissing them out-of-hand (and potentially risking the success of the expansion) is quite large indeed. Only a true fool would roll the dice.

anitajoneb17_ESO

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

You're arguing semantics but the most important implication of your stance is this: Why even bother to have a PTS feedback process to begin with then?

I believe PTS fulfills two purposes :
1/ marketing / advertising / PR (the equivalent of samples and free trials in other businesses)
2/ technical bug testing.

I do not believe it is meant to know whether players/testers like or dislike new general designs. Because it is far too late to change them anyway.

I read all your post and it all makes sense and I agree with nearly everything. My point, though, isn't to say that ZOS should or shouldn't consider PTS-players as representative : they know the potential bias.
My point is that PTS players themselves should not consider themselves as representative of the entire playerbase. Not even close, and no matter how "experienced" they are.

That being said, of course everyone is welcome to express their opinions - that's the point after all. As long as noone thinks they speak for everyone.

As to Pascal's Wager theory : just because ZOS isn't answering or discussing or obeying doesn't mean they're not listening.
But in the very case of video games (and while admitting my rather small experience of that business), it seems that listening to the vocal portion of your playerbase rather than to the overall silent -but paying and playing- portion of them is definitely the most risky way to go.

MindOfTheSwarm

Alchimiste1 wrote: »

I honestly think they don’t listen to feedback at all, they just roll out whatever change they want and that’s that.

Cast times on ults need to go

Nerf to bash damage is a terrible idea(gg stamblade)

Negate feedback on surprise attack stun ? Who cares.

Changes to off balance duration made fights last much longer because the kill window appears less often.

Rip perfected asylum staff, just another high end item that is now Decon material.

Stamcro balanced class?

Class identity is at an all time low, it was nice that mag dk has a unique setup with elf bane + asylum. What they should do is create more unique setups for other classes.

Imagine creating a class rep program filled with people who actually play the game well, taking all their advise and then throwing it in the garbage disposal. Seriously they didn’t even have to do anything except listen to the ideas of these persons.

Also whatever targeting change they did this patch has made this the worst performing patch that I have ever played. I think this is my biggest issue. Casting executioner feels like a 50/50 sometimes.

Half the problem is the community though. Half people can't even agree on certain issues and the other half complain about something but then think that is not enough without suggesting a solution. Players shouldn't complain about anything if they are not prepared to offer up solutions to the greater community.

MartiniDaniels

Jayroo wrote: »

I remember when they changed aoe damage and everyone got pissed and vowed to not play. The next couple patches changed the "fixes" they made. While it's not ideal it's what they do and people get shocked and quit over and over again.

same goes to the eu servers; they continue to be messed up and people continue to play and s**t post

if missing out on mag/stam regen is THAT upsetting to you, perhaps its best you wait for new world to come out so you can complain over at their forums instead /blackdesert.jpeg

When they changed AOE people actually stopped playing, there was mass exodus (mostly magicka mains) as soon as those patch notes were leaked and then dropped on PTS and people start returning only after ZOS started reverting that to reasonable values.

Xvorg

The_Lex wrote: »

BeefyMrTips wrote: »

Should we take this as a sign that they have no intention of listening to the community?

The silence is your answer.

"Words are very unnecessary
They can only do harm" (Martin Gore)

JWillCHS

nk125x wrote: »

Giljabrar wrote: »

See you all in New World

Yep, pity it was delayed.

In the back of my head I've been thinking about this. Even with the most recent complaints I still like the combat from the first alpha I tested.