PTS Update 27 - Feedback Thread for Combat & Classes

Koubo

Definitly sad

Firstmep wrote: »

Pyvos wrote: »

Atherakhia wrote: »

I assume today's notes were probably the last changes for this patch

That is correct, per the top of the PTS patch notes for 6.1.4: "The Elder Scrolls Online v6.1.4 is the final PTS patch before Stonethorn and Update 27 is released on August 24."

So yea, they may as well close all the Update 27 feedback threads. Why bother keeping them open and moderating them if they're not gonna actually read them and listen to feedback?

Pretty much this.
Ample feedback and testing has been done a the changes, and they just went ahead and ignored most of it.
Pretty much everyone I know in game, content creators and a big majority of forum poster are all against the buffs to procsets, yet they just left them as is.
Templar nerfs also received a lot of attention, 0 changes.
Rapid change was also met with overwhelmingly negative feedback, ignored.
And the list goes on..

I said that 1-2 middle patch before, why asking us, or collect our feedback if it dosent change anything. Not even a word saying "dont worry, we have more plans but it will come later, sorry"
NAH, just nerf nerf nerf NERF and nerf again just in case. I'm really really sad because i invest a lot in my Templars (i've one Stam which is my main, and on Mag)
I rerolled, and it's insane how Passives are better, and skills feel more apealing, more usefull. Just a shame!

Onefrkncrzypope

We should follow their advice. We don't have to be here right? We don't have to participate. It sucks but give them the feedback they want. Silence.

Jodynn

Can we get a balance thread? I give so many numbers and testing with no response, if it's not desired I will gladly stop as I'm not gaining anything, just want to support the game and make it more enjoyable, Not a complain buff me nerf them cri thread, but one that requires actual quantitative data AND qualitative data expressing actual gameplay which can make something that looks good numerically inconsistent, much like @WrathOfInnos supplies or myself or others ( sorry I don't recall names atm but I know you're out there )

maxjapank

Firstmep wrote: »

maxjapank wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Well, i shouldnt be suprised that 10 pages of feedback was ignored once again.

Not really sure whats the point in having this thread at all.

Templar going in the dumpster for the next 3-6 months or whatever.

Thanks guys.

PTS has never been a place to listen to player feedback for a long time. When they come out with the first patch notes, that's what they are going to be. These combat devs decided what they want, regardless of what they players want. They haven't had a vision of class identity ever since the original combat dev who designed all the abilities left. It's sad.

Yeah but why even bother with all the feedback threads then? Just tell us that this is what it is and dont bother "collecting" feedback.

There is no purpose other than potentially catching bugs or creating the illusion that players can be active in feedback. There used to be many, many Templar’s who participated in feedback. But it was painfully noticeable the lack of posters this time around. Perhaps that is because some of the more serious players left the game. But I suspect that some just don’t see the point of posting anything. There is zero communication from the devs and every single pts cycle has remained the same as of late.

code65536

Can we make Rapid Maneuvers require Assault 3 instead of Assault 5? It can still be the second skill in the line. Just make it more accessible than A5.

Jodynn

Parsing on PTS still feels annoying and not fun, being unable to sustain without spell symmetry and heavy attacks is annoying and not fun, building in sustain resulting in less DPS than a class than can sustain and be ranged naturally and have more buffs is annoying and not fun.

Cinbri

Burning Light 1sec duration of stacks in not enough.
pts with 200 ping and even using 4 consecutive aedric skills on cooldown is unable to proc passive. On live server it will drastically reduce possibility to proc BL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEI4B5kqgxg
Increase duration of BL to atleast 5sec.

Altruz

Definitly switching to Stamcro..rip templar

YandereGirlfriend

How does Crystal Weapon interact with Molag Kena's proc condition?

Does it still count as attacking with an "ability" even if it is only an augmentation of your Light Attack damage? It would be kind of fun if it didn't and you could reliably proc Molag Kena without otherwise having to alter your rotation.

I would imagine it functions the same as Crushing/Elemental weapon but I've never thought to try that either. Or, who knows, this being ZOS, they could each behave differently!

ke.sardenb14_ESO

Onefrkncrzypope wrote: »

Why was there no reworks of Stam classes?

Sleep724 wrote: »

So why hasn't Stone Giant been touched? No one outside of trials uses this.

No one outside of a tank uses it.

I use this all the time, on my stamina toon. It is not terrible, but I hate the cast time.

Onefrkncrzypope

ke.sardenb14_ESO wrote: »

Onefrkncrzypope wrote: »

Why was there no reworks of Stam classes?

Sleep724 wrote: »

So why hasn't Stone Giant been touched? No one outside of trials uses this.

No one outside of a tank uses it.

I use this all the time, on my stamina toon. It is not terrible, but I hate the cast time.

hyperbole.

Icaruzs

Tharassian Straglers won't be used in serious content with this 6k health debuff and so litle dmg granted (1k) with max stacks.

I suggest increasing the damage granted or reduce the health cost for around 2k.


About Assault skill line, we rly need rapid maneuver for low lv characters.

JMadFour

sooooo....

they are still going with "Vampires shouldn't be playable in group content"?

Cinbri

So what will be compensation for Burning Light to proc twice less, i.e. to deal 100% less damage in aoe scenarios? Obviously not damage increase so here is couple ideas:
1. BL proc restore 1% of your minimal resource. This way offense bring sustain.
2. BL proc heals you for X% of damage caused. This will partially redeem Sweeps loss of healing.

Firstmep

Cinbri wrote: »

So what will be compensation for Burning Light to proc twice less, i.e. to deal 100% less damage in aoe scenarios? Obviously not damage increase so here is couple ideas:
1. BL proc restore 1% of your minimal resource. This way offense bring sustain.
2. BL proc heals you for X% of damage caused. This will partially redeem Sweeps loss of healing.

Nothing. They probably think these fixes are not brutal nerfs.
I'm sure after a couple of dummy parses they said "looks good to me!"

Koubo

Firstmep wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

So what will be compensation for Burning Light to proc twice less, i.e. to deal 100% less damage in aoe scenarios? Obviously not damage increase so here is couple ideas:
1. BL proc restore 1% of your minimal resource. This way offense bring sustain.
2. BL proc heals you for X% of damage caused. This will partially redeem Sweeps loss of healing.

Nothing. They probably think these fixes are not brutal nerfs.
I'm sure after a couple of dummy parses they said "looks good to me!"

i dont think they even know what is a dumie parse

Firstmep

Koubo wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

So what will be compensation for Burning Light to proc twice less, i.e. to deal 100% less damage in aoe scenarios? Obviously not damage increase so here is couple ideas:
1. BL proc restore 1% of your minimal resource. This way offense bring sustain.
2. BL proc heals you for X% of damage caused. This will partially redeem Sweeps loss of healing.

Nothing. They probably think these fixes are not brutal nerfs.
I'm sure after a couple of dummy parses they said "looks good to me!"

i dont think they even know what is a dumie parse

Nah, Gilliam used to be a fairly top tier pver,
Don't know if he's YouTube channel still exists, but he definetly knows a thing or two about dummy parsing.
Look from a pve pov, none of the Templar changes were that bad, burning light will have the same average proc rate on a jab spamming stamplar build.
Backlash was only nerfed for pve, radial sweep isn't used as a pve ultimate at least stamplars use flawless db.
It's just especially the burning light change was implemented without taking pvp into account.
Ever since update 25 brought massive positional desyncs in pvp, jabs have been missing a lot more than before.
A target walking sideways at base speed could mess up your jabs landing if their position is desynced.
And the thing is, burning light would be an ez fix, make javelin, charge, radial sweep, sun shield give 2 stacks of bl instead of one and you have a functioning class again at least.

Koubo

Firstmep wrote: »

Koubo wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

So what will be compensation for Burning Light to proc twice less, i.e. to deal 100% less damage in aoe scenarios? Obviously not damage increase so here is couple ideas:
1. BL proc restore 1% of your minimal resource. This way offense bring sustain.
2. BL proc heals you for X% of damage caused. This will partially redeem Sweeps loss of healing.

Nothing. They probably think these fixes are not brutal nerfs.
I'm sure after a couple of dummy parses they said "looks good to me!"

i dont think they even know what is a dumie parse

Nah, Gilliam used to be a fairly top tier pver,
Don't know if he's YouTube channel still exists, but he definetly knows a thing or two about dummy parsing.
Look from a pve pov, none of the Templar changes were that bad, burning light will have the same average proc rate on a jab spamming stamplar build.
Backlash was only nerfed for pve, radial sweep isn't used as a pve ultimate at least stamplars use flawless db.
It's just especially the burning light change was implemented without taking pvp into account.
Ever since update 25 brought massive positional desyncs in pvp, jabs have been missing a lot more than before.
A target walking sideways at base speed could mess up your jabs landing if their position is desynced.
And the thing is, burning light would be an ez fix, make javelin, charge, radial sweep, sun shield give 2 stacks of bl instead of one and you have a functioning class again at least.

Well, BL changes affect PvE in AoE setup.

Tannus15

As far as I can see using the tormentor enrage is a dps loss.

It needs to meet the single target dot standards as a skill for it to be worth casting otherwise using the GCD on a spammable is just better.

Kory

Hey I was requesting that Knockback be added to one of the Uppercut morphs. Little discussion here : https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/541949/add-knockback-to-uppercut-morph

But the idea was " So keep the cast time 0.8s and Empower effect for Uppercut's Wrecking blow morph for that delayed burst damage that you can follow up with different combination attacks (dps), and for Dizzing Swing, get that original cast time 1 second with effect of knock back and stunning for 3 seconds (Crowd control)."

Athan1

What's the point in providing feedback when it won't be taken into account? Changes meant to satisfy the community are met by disapproval by essentially everyone, yet they'll happen anyway. And then they will be rebalanced two patches later.

No-one likes the maneuver change. No-one likes the templar nerfs. Etc.

Firstmep

Athan1 wrote: »

What's the point in providing feedback when it won't be taken into account? Changes meant to satisfy the community are met by disapproval by essentially everyone, yet they'll happen anyway. And then they will be rebalanced two patches later.

No-one likes the maneuver change. No-one likes the templar nerfs. Etc.

They probably dont have the capacity to look at balance feedback, due to the upcoming aoe tests.
AFAIK the balance team has been tasked to fix cyro lag and thats why we're seeing these tests.

Kory

Athan1 wrote: »

What's the point in providing feedback when it won't be taken into account? Changes meant to satisfy the community are met by disapproval by essentially everyone, yet they'll happen anyway. And then they will be rebalanced two patches later.

No-one likes the maneuver change. No-one likes the templar nerfs. Etc.

I saw a thread where people were upset they fixed an exploit....It depends on who you ask if they are satisfied or disapprove.
Some people like to hide their intentions and biases behind key word "balance". I think the developers know best the direction they want to go, and if they care, they skim through feedback frequently and take what's reasonable to actually implement. Or they can go a certain way in an update and look at feedback like "lets see how they react to this change".

It depends, and an active online game is always changing, you mind as well keep giving feedback because someone else will, and the Devs will see that instead of yours...lol

sabresandiego_ESO

maxjapank wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Well, i shouldnt be suprised that 10 pages of feedback was ignored once again.

Not really sure whats the point in having this thread at all.

Templar going in the dumpster for the next 3-6 months or whatever.

Thanks guys.

PTS has never been a place to listen to player feedback for a long time. When they come out with the first patch notes, that's what they are going to be. These combat devs decided what they want, regardless of what they players want. They haven't had a vision of class identity ever since the original combat dev who designed all the abilities left. It's sad.

Game design isn’t a democracy. They do listen to the player base to an extent. Being loud on forums doesn’t accomplish anything when their data says something contrary to the biased posters on a forum. They are in charge, and they will use multiple data points, but aren’t going to always cave to those who whine the loudest in the forums. This isn’t a democracy

Koubo

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

maxjapank wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Well, i shouldnt be suprised that 10 pages of feedback was ignored once again.

Not really sure whats the point in having this thread at all.

Templar going in the dumpster for the next 3-6 months or whatever.

Thanks guys.

PTS has never been a place to listen to player feedback for a long time. When they come out with the first patch notes, that's what they are going to be. These combat devs decided what they want, regardless of what they players want. They haven't had a vision of class identity ever since the original combat dev who designed all the abilities left. It's sad.

Game design isn’t a democracy. They do listen to the player base to an extent. Being loud on forums doesn’t accomplish anything when their data says something contrary to the biased posters on a forum. They are in charge, and they will use multiple data points, but aren’t going to always cave to those who whine the loudest in the forums. This isn’t a democracy

Still, i agree with your point but the curent in coming patch hurt badly Templars while they warent top (but good) and pretty meh/bad in PvP. As far as i know, Stamplar is one of the most nerfed class this patch for PvE and will probably be almost unplyable in PvP (or anything else is just better)
Well... I'm just gona practice another toon and see, if it's so bad i'll just play something else. Maybe they needed to reduce the amount of templars played

Firstmep

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

maxjapank wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Well, i shouldnt be suprised that 10 pages of feedback was ignored once again.

Not really sure whats the point in having this thread at all.

Templar going in the dumpster for the next 3-6 months or whatever.

Thanks guys.

PTS has never been a place to listen to player feedback for a long time. When they come out with the first patch notes, that's what they are going to be. These combat devs decided what they want, regardless of what they players want. They haven't had a vision of class identity ever since the original combat dev who designed all the abilities left. It's sad.

Game design isn’t a democracy. They do listen to the player base to an extent. Being loud on forums doesn’t accomplish anything when their data says something contrary to the biased posters on a forum. They are in charge, and they will use multiple data points, but aren’t going to always cave to those who whine the loudest in the forums. This isn’t a democracy

Absolutely correct, that doesnt mean they shouldnt be able to take advice from experienced players.

We still have a class rep program(if only in name at this point), which they created specifically to help with balance, and feedback collecting.

Listening to player feedback on balance is actually something other companies do, not just in mmos.

At the end of the day this is a game, and its up to the devs to make it fun for us so we come back to play AND pay.

And while there can be different opinions on balance, you would suprised how many thing top players typically aggree on.

YandereGirlfriend

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

maxjapank wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Well, i shouldnt be suprised that 10 pages of feedback was ignored once again.

Not really sure whats the point in having this thread at all.

Templar going in the dumpster for the next 3-6 months or whatever.

Thanks guys.

PTS has never been a place to listen to player feedback for a long time. When they come out with the first patch notes, that's what they are going to be. These combat devs decided what they want, regardless of what they players want. They haven't had a vision of class identity ever since the original combat dev who designed all the abilities left. It's sad.

Game design isn’t a democracy. They do listen to the player base to an extent. Being loud on forums doesn’t accomplish anything when their data says something contrary to the biased posters on a forum. They are in charge, and they will use multiple data points, but aren’t going to always cave to those who whine the loudest in the forums. This isn’t a democracy

It may not be a democracy but only a fool ignores wise counsel when it is made available to them.

High-end players in their respective domains likely know much more about how game balance works... in actual practice... than all of ZOS' spreadsheets and back-end analytics put together.

Not listening to informed feedback is how we end up Scalebreaker DoTs or the Thrassian debacle or even the monster-buff to Dead-Water's Guile, an arguably already OP set that they have buffed to Masser and Secunda and beyond.

As I've grown weary of saying, so many mistakes could have been short-circuited had they simply listened to the consensus of top players on hot-button balance changes. They routinely ignore it... and then over-correct at a later date.

Firstmep

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

sabresandiego_ESO wrote: »

maxjapank wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Well, i shouldnt be suprised that 10 pages of feedback was ignored once again.

Not really sure whats the point in having this thread at all.

Templar going in the dumpster for the next 3-6 months or whatever.

Thanks guys.

PTS has never been a place to listen to player feedback for a long time. When they come out with the first patch notes, that's what they are going to be. These combat devs decided what they want, regardless of what they players want. They haven't had a vision of class identity ever since the original combat dev who designed all the abilities left. It's sad.

Game design isn’t a democracy. They do listen to the player base to an extent. Being loud on forums doesn’t accomplish anything when their data says something contrary to the biased posters on a forum. They are in charge, and they will use multiple data points, but aren’t going to always cave to those who whine the loudest in the forums. This isn’t a democracy

It may not be a democracy but only a fool ignores wise counsel when it is made available to them.

High-end players in their respective domains likely know much more about how game balance works... in actual practice... than all of ZOS' spreadsheets and back-end analytics put together.

Not listening to informed feedback is how we end up Scalebreaker DoTs or the Thrassian debacle or even the monster-buff to Dead-Water's Guile, an arguably already OP set that they have buffed to Masser and Secunda and beyond.

As I've grown weary of saying, so many mistakes could have been short-circuited had they simply listened to the consensus of top players on hot-button balance changes. They routinely ignore it... and then over-correct at a later date.

Sums it up pretty well.
Quite a few people do extensive testing on the pts, leave their feedback, and it gets ignored completely.

cs_spitfireb16_ESO

It feels like templar has been disregarding it's own name's meaning for a long time. Historically speaking Templars carried swords and shields and further to have an affinity with heavenly sunlight. Therefor I suggest completely redesigning Templar adding more sunlight in the shape of offense and defense FIRE abilities and shield specializations to the class. Most templar abillities currently do just magic damage, but why not give the class fire dmg specialization? For example the beam ability (radiant destruction) wouldn't it be more fitting if this was fire damage instead of magic damage?

This would help the templar class differentiate and be it's own special class a bit better.

cs_spitfireb16_ESO

For example just like a sorcerer has more shock damage specialized abilities and warden has more frost damage specialized abilities. Would be more in line with that if Templar got more fie damage abilities.