Should CP 1.0 to CP 2.0 conversion should be done by exp instead of CPs ?

Fhritz

Hi.
So today I logged on the PTS to see the new CP sytem. And let me say : this system is great, I love it so much !
But something worry me : it seems that CP will stay the same, regardless of the change made on the exp gap between CP

Here's my CP on live



And my CP on PTS


The exp cap is way lower per cp (even if there is no enlightenment) but i'm still with the same CP as before.
I don't think that's very fair. I've gained ~ 206.760.000 EXP in the CP 1.0, and since the exp gap is lower between cp , if I grind the same amount of exp on the new system I should end up with more cp, right? what do you think? ?

ApoAlaia

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

There has been some back and forth on this topic but after reading the rationale from 'both sides of the aisle' I haven't changed my mind.

To me accrued XP is accrued XP. If the curve changes the yield should change accordingly.

ThorianB

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

No because..
1. The curve is adjusted to give newer players/ players that don't play as much a chance to catch up. This is vital in MMO's to allow those that start after release to be able to catch up in a reasonable time frame to those that started before. "Is it to late to start playing ESO" and " Will i be able to catch up?" are faqs on the ESO subreddit. These catch up mechanisms are vital to encouraging new players to try and stick with the game.

2. The soft cap is likely to be set at about 1080 CP after testing is done. Just because it is done on PTS doesn't mean its going to live. The curve would be adjusted to 1080 CP so those further behind have an easier time to catch up.

3. ESO has no real grinding mechanism that allows for power leveling. We can't be leveled by higher levels or grind "red" mobs for huge XP bonuses like many other games. The best we have is skyreach paid run which most lower levels won't be able to afford much of. This makes the catch up mechanism especially important in ESO because there isn't ways to manually catch up like other mmos.

CaptainVenom

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

Why people are so afraid of some leveling?

jaws343

CaptainVenom wrote: »

Why people are so afraid of some leveling?

Because they have been leveling for years already.

dhoward5b14_ESO

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

Converting your XP to CP seems like the simple choice to me. I know several people who will be upset if they do not up your CP based on XP. I don't know anyone who will be upset if this happens (they may not think it is necessary, but they don't really care).

remosito

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

Yes. Not our fault ZOS dropped the ball and took them two and a half years. And nothing stopped them from keep increasing penalty point. without increasing spendable points....

the amount of exp I would loose is worth over a thousand hours of my playtime.

I dont think my motivation would survive...

remosito

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

CaptainVenom wrote: »

Why people are so afraid of some leveling?

its over a thousand hours to get back to where I should be imo. You can belittle that all you want as "some levelling"

RlyDontKnow

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

I'd say yes because the effort to obtain XP will be about the same before and after the changes. The changes therefore do not justify devaluing XP earned.
My expectation by precdents is that this won't happen, though. When the catch-up was introduced and CP became increasingly harder to earn the CP got recalculated (which was the right thing to do imo). However when the CP caps were raised the CP never got recalculated (wrong call imo). Instead you just had a bit of a head-start on getting to the new cap again (or usually you were beyond it already). So it seems pretty clear to me that they simply go for the maximum punishment on players every time they adjust the XP to CP conversion ratio.
I do, however, hope that this time the CP will be reevaluated. The major difference now is: Before it was to be expected that most active players had already reached the new cap when the cap was raised. However this time the hard cap is raised way beyond the soft cap. So even those who surpass the soft cap already are effectively still catching up. And they will be catching up for a *long* time to come given how ridiculously high the hard cap is and that there are players who reached it already.

Replying to ThorianB's points:
1. They'll still be able to catch up up to the soft cap easily. Readjusting by XP earned just places those who already played a long time a bit further beyond the soft cap (i.e. give them more horizontal progression). If that is an issue then the vertical progression goes on beyond the soft cap. In that case either the soft cap should be raised or the vertical progression shortened.
2. I don't understand this argument. It doesn't really matter what the exact soft cap is. The question is how long it takes to get there (should be realistically achievable by new players to keep the game alive) and whether or not vertical progression continues beyond the soft cap. None of that seems to be related to how to treat existing players, though.
3. Nobody argued against a catch-up mechanism. A one-off punishment for existing players is not an effective catch-up mechanism, though. A year or two after the change you'll have the same issue that you have now, but already earned XP won't be devalued. Why should XP earned before the change be inherently less valuable than XP earned after the change? The difficulty of earning it didn't really change. Only the conversion rate to CP did.

Sju

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

It should stay the same as they intend. New players will already have less motivation, more intimidation when they see players over 1200.

Faded

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

People who stopped playing when we still had veteran ranks and were V4 or w/e should be automatically bumped to CP 160, though. Everything CP 10 to CP 159 is an antiquated mess that should be erased from the game.

majorana

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

I believe cp should be adjusted to the new curve to reduce the grind needed by existing players and the enlightenment mechanism should be adjusted to enable the newer players to catch up.

CleymenZero

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

ThorianB wrote: »

No because..
1. The curve is adjusted to give newer players/ players that don't play as much a chance to catch up. This is vital in MMO's to allow those that start after release to be able to catch up in a reasonable time frame to those that started before. "Is it to late to start playing ESO" and " Will i be able to catch up?" are faqs on the ESO subreddit. These catch up mechanisms are vital to encouraging new players to try and stick with the game.

2. The soft cap is likely to be set at about 1080 CP after testing is done. Just because it is done on PTS doesn't mean its going to live. The curve would be adjusted to 1080 CP so those further behind have an easier time to catch up.

3. ESO has no real grinding mechanism that allows for power leveling. We can't be leveled by higher levels or grind "red" mobs for huge XP bonuses like many other games. The best we have is skyreach paid run which most lower levels won't be able to afford much of. This makes the catch up mechanism especially important in ESO because there isn't ways to manually catch up like other mmos.

I don't agree with your position mainly because cp won't matter as much for achieving your role therefore less impact to me = no need to gimp vet players.

With these new CP, you can max out your dps role at around 1200 CP considering the reductions they've done.

That's taking all relevant passives from defensive and offensive that don't need to be slotted plus the ones that do for PvE DPS.

Even with those passives, there won't be a 50% difference with and without CP anymore. The difference will be of a total of like 20% maybe?

With no CP, you'll lose 1.8k stam, 3% crit chance, 1.7k pen I think then in the slottable ones you'll have 4 of the following that would be lost: 10% crit damage then either another 15% crit damage for targets flanked, 10% dot damage, 10% single target damage or 10% AoE damage.

You'll slot the ones that benefit your build the most depending on your class and that it but I don't think it'll get you more than 20% net total damage when you consider all the stats and weapon damage buffs you're getting.

Quick example (keeping in mind that this is "breakfast table math"):
They nerfed crit so for example, your AY Rele build lost a minimum of 5% crit bringing you to something like 60-65% crit depending on weapons chosen which will probably push daggers away from your selection.

Under perfect condition, which will not necessarily happen in raid, you would get 25% extra crit damage. That's 25% extra base damage 60% on the time. Now how much net damage is 25% crit damage? It depends on your effective crit damage.

Effective crit damage is easily around 100% and up depending on horn uptimes. Dealing an extra 25% crit damage brings you to 125%. As crit damage is added on top of base damage it's basically 200% vs 225% which turns out to be an increase of 12.5%.

If signale target abilities are 60% of your damage, 10% more ST damage is 6% extra total damage and so on so forth. In essence, I don't think CP will account for much more than 20% extra damage therefore there is no need to gimp vets.

Xuhora

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

in my opinion the fact that we could earn CPs beyond the hard cap is allready enough of a headstart into the new CP-rework. i never even thought about an adjustment, since i dont feel "robbed" of CPs.

further i believe that the feeling of accomplishment in the new CP-System is higher, since i can invest my points again. while i rarely even see players above 1500 CP let alone anyone with 3000+ i believe the CP-GAP in PVP is more of an imaginary thing than a real issue, same goes for PVE. there wont be any callouts LFM vKA 3000+, Link achievement.

I feel like not adjusting vet players to the new CP curve leans more towards equity of players, which in my book nets in a benefit for all players.

besides where is the reason for raising a hard cap if you have hit it again after 3 weeks of playing. its been too long of a stagnating thing with earning CPs and not beeing able to spend them. Again, i will enjoy beeing able to invest every earned point again and im fine with it taking quiet a while to hit hardcap again.

karekiz

They should.

But they don't know how to convert it I am willing to bet.

BalticBlues

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

ZOS, please do not create two different XP systems.
Please keep things simple and understandable.

For all players, the same XP should always result in the same CP.

simpledude31998

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

Sure. XP must be scaled to new system, as this guy mentiond here it's 2 complitly different systems

Ragnaroek93

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

It should but it won't happen.

Ranger209

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

It has never before been readjusted, and shouldn't be now. The 9 or 10 times that the CP level cap has changed have always made it so that people who were not capped needed less XP to get their CP than those who did it before them. The CP XP scale has changed 9 or 10 times already with no adjustments. The reason for the cap was, and still is mind you, to allow people to catch up who have started later. If we start adjusting peoples CP by XP that catch up mechanic will basically be undone.

Ringod123

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

From my large post in the CP system Feedback Thread -
CP simply HAS to be converted across to the new system based on total XP earned given that CP points will require less XP going forward.
Contrary to some opinions this is indeed a different scenario to the Arena Weapons debacle, in that case nothing was taken away from the players, their weapons just weren't upgraded to reflect what they had already achieved.
The only alternative to a total XP earned conversion however is a straight CP conversion, which would obviously have to mean players have their total XP earned lowered in the new system to the new value that awards the same CP as we have in the current system (as it will take less XP per CP level in the new system).
Removing XP we have already earned and forcing us to earn it again is simply unacceptable in my opinion and the total XP conversion with lower XP per level is already enough to help new players catch up quicker.
If it does end up being a 1 to 1 CP conversion with anything like the current "soft cap" necessary to not be at a disadvantage in my home Cyro campaign it'll be the last straw for me after years of declining performance and a year of performance which yielded 0 performance gains.

simpledude31998

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

Ranger209 wrote: »

It has never before been readjusted, and shouldn't be now. The 9 or 10 times that the CP level cap has changed have always made it so that people who were not capped needed less XP to get their CP than those who did it before them. The CP XP scale has changed 9 or 10 times already with no adjustments. The reason for the cap was, and still is mind you, to allow people to catch up who have started later. If we start adjusting peoples CP by XP that catch up mechanic will basically be undone.

CP 2.0 isn't CP 1.0 it's completly different system so it's a mistake to compare them;
Compare CP 1.0 and CP 2.0 like Vet Ranks and CP 1.0

TwinLamps

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

Would be fair, imho.

ThorianB

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

CleymenZero wrote: »

ThorianB wrote: »

No because..
1. The curve is adjusted to give newer players/ players that don't play as much a chance to catch up. This is vital in MMO's to allow those that start after release to be able to catch up in a reasonable time frame to those that started before. "Is it to late to start playing ESO" and " Will i be able to catch up?" are faqs on the ESO subreddit. These catch up mechanisms are vital to encouraging new players to try and stick with the game.

2. The soft cap is likely to be set at about 1080 CP after testing is done. Just because it is done on PTS doesn't mean its going to live. The curve would be adjusted to 1080 CP so those further behind have an easier time to catch up.

3. ESO has no real grinding mechanism that allows for power leveling. We can't be leveled by higher levels or grind "red" mobs for huge XP bonuses like many other games. The best we have is skyreach paid run which most lower levels won't be able to afford much of. This makes the catch up mechanism especially important in ESO because there isn't ways to manually catch up like other mmos.

I don't agree with your position mainly because cp won't matter as much for achieving your role therefore less impact to me = no need to gimp vet players.

With these new CP, you can max out your dps role at around 1200 CP considering the reductions they've done.

That's taking all relevant passives from defensive and offensive that don't need to be slotted plus the ones that do for PvE DPS.

Even with those passives, there won't be a 50% difference with and without CP anymore. The difference will be of a total of like 20% maybe?

With no CP, you'll lose 1.8k stam, 3% crit chance, 1.7k pen I think then in the slottable ones you'll have 4 of the following that would be lost: 10% crit damage then either another 15% crit damage for targets flanked, 10% dot damage, 10% single target damage or 10% AoE damage.

You'll slot the ones that benefit your build the most depending on your class and that it but I don't think it'll get you more than 20% net total damage when you consider all the stats and weapon damage buffs you're getting.

Quick example (keeping in mind that this is "breakfast table math"):
They nerfed crit so for example, your AY Rele build lost a minimum of 5% crit bringing you to something like 60-65% crit depending on weapons chosen which will probably push daggers away from your selection.

Under perfect condition, which will not necessarily happen in raid, you would get 25% extra crit damage. That's 25% extra base damage 60% on the time. Now how much net damage is 25% crit damage? It depends on your effective crit damage.

Effective crit damage is easily around 100% and up depending on horn uptimes. Dealing an extra 25% crit damage brings you to 125%. As crit damage is added on top of base damage it's basically 200% vs 225% which turns out to be an increase of 12.5%.

If signale target abilities are 60% of your damage, 10% more ST damage is 6% extra total damage and so on so forth. In essence, I don't think CP will account for much more than 20% extra damage therefore there is no need to gimp vets.

It doesn't gimp anyone. This is the only MMO that has ever let you bank XP past cap. Demanding they also readjust CP to cater to vet players( who they are actually trying to bring down a couple of notches) is just being greedy. The "give them an inch and they will take a mile." phrase basically describes the demands made by many vets on CP. ZOS was generous to let us bank our XP for the CP levels increase. Instead of being grateful that they let us do this, unlike any other MMO that doesn't, we demand more charity from them.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

I'd say yes because the effort to obtain XP will be about the same before and after the changes. The changes therefore do not justify devaluing XP earned.
My expectation by precdents is that this won't happen, though. When the catch-up was introduced and CP became increasingly harder to earn the CP got recalculated (which was the right thing to do imo). However when the CP caps were raised the CP never got recalculated (wrong call imo). Instead you just had a bit of a head-start on getting to the new cap again (or usually you were beyond it already). So it seems pretty clear to me that they simply go for the maximum punishment on players every time they adjust the XP to CP conversion ratio.
I do, however, hope that this time the CP will be reevaluated. The major difference now is: Before it was to be expected that most active players had already reached the new cap when the cap was raised. However this time the hard cap is raised way beyond the soft cap. So even those who surpass the soft cap already are effectively still catching up. And they will be catching up for a *long* time to come given how ridiculously high the hard cap is and that there are players who reached it already.

Replying to ThorianB's points:
1. They'll still be able to catch up up to the soft cap easily. Readjusting by XP earned just places those who already played a long time a bit further beyond the soft cap (i.e. give them more horizontal progression). If that is an issue then the vertical progression goes on beyond the soft cap. In that case either the soft cap should be raised or the vertical progression shortened.
2. I don't understand this argument. It doesn't really matter what the exact soft cap is. The question is how long it takes to get there (should be realistically achievable by new players to keep the game alive) and whether or not vertical progression continues beyond the soft cap. None of that seems to be related to how to treat existing players, though.
3. Nobody argued against a catch-up mechanism. A one-off punishment for existing players is not an effective catch-up mechanism, though. A year or two after the change you'll have the same issue that you have now, but already earned XP won't be devalued. Why should XP earned before the change be inherently less valuable than XP earned after the change? The difficulty of earning it didn't really change. Only the conversion rate to CP did.

1. Good! If they can hit the soft cap easily then vet players that are most of the way there will already be at soft cap or near it so no need to gift them a bunch of free levels just because. This is like players in other games demanding all the XP they didn't get for leveling once they hit cap be given to them once the cap was raised even though they understood that once they hit cap they could no longer progress. While we can progress past a soft cap that is only because ZOS is nice enough to give us a soft cap and not make that a hard cap and just raise the hard cap 30 CP a quarter.
2. It does matter because vet players who want free CP have less of an argument if that cap is 1080 CP than if its 3600 CP. You don't really need those extra levels if your at or near the cap as soon as its raised and you don't deserve them just because they adjusted the XP curve. That isn't how that works, in.any.mmo.
3. That is how it works in all mmos. XP doesn't have a set value. Your 1 million XP might not have the same value as my 1 million XP. If you grind yours mostly at a normal rate but i always run enlightened and XP buffs,i already needed a lot less work to get the same amount of XP. So the whole argument of " they are devaluing my XP" is irrelevant. If you choose to grind up to 810 ASAP and don't get to take a lot of advantages of enlightenment and Xp events( as you would do fewer before reaching 810) and then get your rate reduced for 2 years. That is all on you. That is your choice. You accepted the terms of that agreement when you decided it was worth you grinding to get to 810 as fast as possible so you could enjoy those perks before others or so you could use them faster.

Your reward for your "hard work" is that you get to take advantage of those CP faster. Whereas if i am barely doing enough to use enlightenment and i go through a lot more XP events before i hit 810 i don't get the benefit of 810 like you but ZOS does help me catch up so i don't get to far behind. So:

- Hard fast grind to soft cap: Rewarded with being able to use the current full potential before others. Able to bank more XP for upcoming cap increases.
- Casual slow leveling to soft cap: Reward is replaced with more XP boosting opportunities so you don't feel like you are never going to catch up.

If i am a casual player, i don't feel like i am just going to get further and further behind because i don't have a lot of play time and don't want to spend that time grinding away just to keep up. The current system is more than fair to vet players.

remosito

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

ThorianB wrote: »

The current system is more than fair to vet players.

After 4200 hours which it took me to get to CP1200 not even be able to do horizontal spread of CP is fair?

Loosing 60% of my Experience is fair?

That's 2500 hours of playtime down the drain mate.

IonicKai

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

I think ZOS made a huge step in the right direction by squashing the curve (this primarily helps newer players). That said I would prefer they convert our calculation because some big XP jumps for things like dungeon kill achievements can't be gained again. I also would like the many hours I put in to matter more when they change the system on such a large and fundamental scale after years of not touching it. Handling transitions to new systems is a huge part of good relations with the player base and really the only people that this genuinely affects negatively is those that are already at 3600 CP (which are few and far between) and they could always give them something as a pat on the back.

rnklippel

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

If my CP was adjusted base on XP, I would instantly jump from 1397 to 2185. I don't want to have the feeling of reaching 1500.... 2000... taken out of me. I want to experience all the road up there, cp by cp. Even more now with the curve adjusted down, when I'll see my cp climbing fast again. I'll need 3 times less xp to gain 1 cp compared to live at my current position.

ThorianB

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

remosito wrote: »

ThorianB wrote: »

The current system is more than fair to vet players.

After 4200 hours which it took me to get to CP1200 not even be able to do horizontal spread of CP is fair?

Loosing 60% of my Experience is fair?

That's 2500 hours of playtime down the drain mate.

Your not losing anything. You will have the exact amount of XP that you earned. No more, no less. That is no playtime down the drain as you were earning XP for a system that you knew was going to be replaced for more than 2 years.

Ranger209

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

simpledude31998 wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

It has never before been readjusted, and shouldn't be now. The 9 or 10 times that the CP level cap has changed have always made it so that people who were not capped needed less XP to get their CP than those who did it before them. The CP XP scale has changed 9 or 10 times already with no adjustments. The reason for the cap was, and still is mind you, to allow people to catch up who have started later. If we start adjusting peoples CP by XP that catch up mechanic will basically be undone.

CP 2.0 isn't CP 1.0 it's completly different system so it's a mistake to compare them;
Compare CP 1.0 and CP 2.0 like Vet Ranks and CP 1.0

No one knows how much XP they have. They are just looking at curve charts for 810 ,and 1080, and maybe now 1800, and cross referencing their CP levels to that chart and saying this is how much XP I have earned, but those charts do not reflect XP actually earned, they reflect how much XP it will take for someone with 0 CP to get to a certain level under each of the scales.

Vaoh

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

Very obviously yes!

Choices are:
1. Yes..... allow high CP players to retain and show off their work over the many years they’ve played (can still only slot 12 active CP stars!). Lower CP players also get a much needed boost for important passive CP stars.

2. No..... Cut out hundreds of millions, up to billions of experience points from high CP players. Multiple years of legit experience gain totally deleted from high CP player accounts because they downloaded an update.

You can’t even use up to 3600CPs at the same time, not even close. Which makes it pointless to take away all that experience. I’m at 1500CP range and it’s terrible lol so I can only imagine how it is for those at the CP1600-CP1800 range! Personally I haven’t ever played a game before that pushed out an update which so drastically devalued a symbol of the player’s time played for essentially no reason.

remosito

Yes, CP should be converted proportionally to the EXP earned before (Because...)

Ranger209 wrote: »

simpledude31998 wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

It has never before been readjusted, and shouldn't be now. The 9 or 10 times that the CP level cap has changed have always made it so that people who were not capped needed less XP to get their CP than those who did it before them. The CP XP scale has changed 9 or 10 times already with no adjustments. The reason for the cap was, and still is mind you, to allow people to catch up who have started later. If we start adjusting peoples CP by XP that catch up mechanic will basically be undone.

CP 2.0 isn't CP 1.0 it's completly different system so it's a mistake to compare them;
Compare CP 1.0 and CP 2.0 like Vet Ranks and CP 1.0

No one knows how much XP they have. They are just looking at curve charts for 810 ,and 1080, and maybe now 1800, and cross referencing their CP levels to that chart and saying this is how much XP I have earned, but those charts do not reflect XP actually earned, they reflect how much XP it will take for someone with 0 CP to get to a certain level under each of the scales.

I know plus everybody elso who started post 810 cap.

There's the 10 chars to level 50 to add in my case. But that's rounding error pretty much...

UnknownResults

No, CP should stay the same even if the gap change (Because...)

I'm neutral in this, as much as I wouldn't mind XP being converted, I also don't care about the xp as much as I do whether or not I can still do the content I could before.

remosito wrote: »

ThorianB wrote: »

The current system is more than fair to vet players.

After 4200 hours which it took me to get to CP1200 not even be able to do horizontal spread of CP is fair?

Loosing 60% of my Experience is fair?

That's 2500 hours of playtime down the drain mate.

I don't think you should equate your XP loss to game time loss, because I sure hope you were playing the game to have fun rather than specifically grind that XP. If that's all you were doing then whether or not they give you the xp conversion it may be time to find a new game.

It's very difficult (if not impossible) for them to cater the game to every individual, some people see it as being handed something they want to work towards, and others see it as something that they've already worked for. If I had to choose 1 or the other I'd probably vote no, just because I see it as that's how much xp it took to get you somewhere before it was changed, and nothing will take away your game time and expertise. Also I enjoy the feeling of working towards something.

Is it fair? Only you can answer that for yourself. I may be wrong to compare the 2, but is it fair that they change and balance sets? What I do know is they aren't taking away cp you' and I have already gotten, and it's the choice of each individual how much they play a game.

That being said am I going to lose sleep if they do convert XP? Nope. (Also excuse the failed quote, I'm still learning how the forums work lol)